Advertisement

An active learning reliability method with multiple kernel functions based on radial basis function

  • Lingjian Shi
  • Beibei SunEmail author
  • Dauda Sh. Ibrahim
Research Paper

Abstract

Surrogate models combined with Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) are effective ways to address failure probability problems, which involve time-consuming computer codes, in structural reliability analysis. Recently, many active learning functions based on the Kriging model have been developed to conduct adaptive sequential sampling due to its predicted value and variance. However, effective methods for learning functions based on other surrogate models to address failure probability problems remain sparse. Hence, this paper presents a new adaptive sampling function that combines the radial basis function (RBF) approximate model with MCS to calculate the failure probability of structures. The new learning function is named the active RBF method with multiple kernel functions and Monte Carlo simulation (ARBFM-MCS). It uses several RBF kernel functions to estimate the local uncertainty of the predicted values based on interquartile range (IQR) to formulate the active learning function. This method can establish several surrogate models simultaneously for application to different problems. The stopping criterion of this method is that if one of the errors calculated by the various RBF models meets the demand, the learning process stops automatically. Furthermore, the method is also compared with the k-fold cross-validation approach based on a single RBF kernel function and some other approaches presented in the literature. Six numerical examples are considered to verify the accuracy and the efficiency of the proposed method. The results reveal that the multiple kernel function method is effective and has the same accuracy level as other methods. Moreover, for these examples, the method often calls the limit state function in fewer times to obtain accurate failure probabilities.

Keywords

Radial basis function Active learning function Surrogate model Reliability analysis Monte Carlo simulation 

Notes

References

  1. Aute V, Saleh K, Abdelaziz O, Azarm S, Radermacher R (2013) Cross-validation based single response adaptive design of experiments for Kriging metamodeling of deterministic computer simulations. Struct Multidiscip Optim 48(3):581–605Google Scholar
  2. Basudhar A, Missoum S, Sanchez AH (2008) Limit state function identification using support vector machines for discontinuous responses and disjoint failure domains. Probab Eng Mech 23(1):1–11Google Scholar
  3. Bdour T, Guiffaut C, Reineix A (2016) Use of adaptive Kriging metamodeling in reliability analysis of radiated susceptibility in coaxial shielded cables. IEEE T Electromagn C 58(1):95–102Google Scholar
  4. Ben Salem M, Roustant O, Gamboa F, Tomaso L (2017) Universal prediction distribution for surrogate models. SIAM/ASA J Uncertain Quantif 5(1):1086–1109MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Bichon BJ, Eldred MS, Swiler LP, Mahadevan S, McFarland JM (2008) Efficient global reliability analysis for nonlinear implicit performance functions. AIAA J 46(10):2459–2468Google Scholar
  6. Bourinet JM (2016) Rare-event probability estimation with adaptive support vector regression surrogates. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 150:210–221Google Scholar
  7. Bourinet JM, Deheeger F, Lemaire M (2011) Assessing small failure probabilities by combined subset simulation and support vector machines. Struct Saf 33(6):343–353Google Scholar
  8. Chau MQ, Han X, Bai YC, Jiang C (2012) A structural reliability analysis method based on radial basis function. Comput Mater Con 27(2):128–142Google Scholar
  9. Chau MQ, Han X, Jiang C, Bai YC, Tran TN, Truong VH (2014) An efficient PMA based reliability analysis technique using radial basis function. Eng Comput 31(6):1098–1115Google Scholar
  10. Chen W, Fu ZJ, Chen CS (2014a) Recent advances in radial basis function collocation methods. Springer, HeidelbergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Chen ZZ, Qiu HB, Gao L, Li XK, Li PG (2014b) A local adaptive sampling method for reliability-based design optimization using Kriging model. Struct Multidiscip Optim 49(3):401–416MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen ZZ, Peng SP, Li XK, Qiu HB, Xiong HD, Gao L, Li PG (2015) An important boundary sampling method for reliability-based design optimization using Kriging model. Struct Multidiscip Optim 52(1):55–70MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. Cheng J, Li QS, Xiao RC (2008) A new artificial neural network-based response surface method for structural reliability analysis. Probab Eng Mech 23(1):51–63Google Scholar
  14. Chojaczyk AA, Teixeira AP, Neves LC, Cardoso JB, Soares CG (2015) Review and application of artificial neural networks models in reliability analysis. Struct Saf 52(3):78–89Google Scholar
  15. Deng J (2006) Structural reliability analysis for implicit performance function using radial basis function network. Int J Solids Struct 43(11–12):3255–3291zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Deng J, Gu DS, Li XB, Yue ZQ (2005) Structural reliability analysis for implicit performance functions using artificial neural network. Struct Saf 27(1):25–48Google Scholar
  17. Duan LB, Xiao NC, Hu ZH, Li GY, Cheng AG (2017) An efficient lightweight design strategy for body-in-white based on implicit parameterization technique. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55(5):1927–1943Google Scholar
  18. Dubourg V, Sudret B, Deheeger F (2013) Metamodel-based importance sampling for structural reliability analysis. Probab Eng Mech 33:47–57Google Scholar
  19. Echard B, Gayton N, Lemaire M (2011) AK-MCS: an active learning reliability method combining Kriging and Monte Carlo simulation. Struct Saf 33(2):145–154Google Scholar
  20. Echard B, Gayton N, Lemaire M, Relun N (2013) A combined importance sampling and Kriging reliability method for small failure probabilities with time-demanding numerical models. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 111:232–240Google Scholar
  21. Gaspar B, Teixeira AP, Soares CG (2014) Assessment of the efficiency of Kriging surrogate models for structural reliability analysis. Probabilist Eng Mech 37:24–34Google Scholar
  22. Gaspar B, Teixeira AP, Soares CG (2017) Adaptive surrogate model with active refinement combining Kriging and a trust region method. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 165:277–291Google Scholar
  23. Hu Z, Mahadevan S (2016) Global sensitivity analysis-enhanced surrogate (GSAS) modeling for reliability analysis. Struct Multidiscip Optim 53(3):501–521MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Jin R, Chen W, Sudjianto A (2002) On sequential sampling for global metamodeling in engineering design. In: The ASME 2002 design engineering technical conferences and computer and information in engineering conference, Montreal, Canada, 29 September-2 OctoberGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones DR, Schonlau M, Welch WJ (1998) Efficient global optimization of expensive black-box functions. J Glob Optim 13(4):455–492MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Kaymaz I (2005) Application of Kriging method to structural reliability problems. Struct Saf 27(2):133–151Google Scholar
  27. Keshtegar B, Chakraborty S (2018) A hybrid self-adaptive conjugate first order reliability method for robust structural reliability analysis. Appl Math Model 53:319–332MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. Kleijnen JP, Beers WV (2004) Application-driven sequential designs for simulation experiments: Kriging metamodelling. J Oper Res Soc 55(8):876–883zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Li X, Li X, Su Y (2016a) A hybrid approach combining uniform design and support vector machine to probabilistic tunnel stability assessment. Struct Saf 61:22–42Google Scholar
  30. Li GJ, Lu ZZ, Li LY, Ren B (2016b) Aleatory and epistemic uncertainties analysis based on non-probabilistic reliability and its Kriging solution. Appl Math Model 40(9):5703–5716MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Li X, Gong CL, Gu LX, Gao WK, Jing Z, Su H (2018) A sequential surrogate method for reliability analysis based on radial basis function. Struct Saf 73:42–53Google Scholar
  32. Liu X, Wu YZ, Wang BX, Ding JW, Jie HX (2017) An adaptive local range sampling method for reliability-based design optimization using support vector machine and Kriging model. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55(6):2285–2304Google Scholar
  33. Lv ZY, Lu ZZ, Wang P (2015) A new learning function for Kriging and its application to solve reliability problems in engineering. Comput Math Appl 70(5):1182–1197MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. Pan QJ, Dias D (2017) An efficient reliability method combining adaptive support vector machine and Monte Carlo simulation. Struct Saf 67:85–95Google Scholar
  35. Romero VJ, Swiler LP, Giunta AA (2004) Construction of response surface based on progressive-lattice-sampling experimental designs with application to uncertainty propagation. Struct Saf 26(2):201–219Google Scholar
  36. Schueremans L, Van Gemert D (2005) Benefit of splines and neural networks in simulation based structural reliability analysis. Struct Saf 27(3):246–261Google Scholar
  37. Tong C, Sun ZL, Zhao QL, Wang QB, Wang S (2015) A hybrid algorithm for reliability analysis combining Kriging and subset simulation importance sampling. J Mech Sci Technol 29(8):3183–3193Google Scholar
  38. Viana FA, Haftka RT, Steffen V (2009) Multiple surrogates: how cross-validation errors can help us to obtain the best predictor. Struct Multidiscip Optim 39(4):439–457Google Scholar
  39. Xiao NC, Zuo MJ, Guo W (2018a) Efficient reliability analysis based on adaptive sequential sampling design and cross-validation. Appl Math Model 58:404–420MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  40. Xiao NC, Zuo MJ, Zhou CN (2018b) A new adaptive sequential sampling method to construct surrogate models for efficient reliability analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 169:330–338Google Scholar
  41. Xiong FF, Greene S, Chen W, Xiong Y, Yang S (2010) A new sparse grid based method for uncertainty propagation. Struct Multidiscip Optim 41:335–349MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Yang XF, Liu YS, Gao Y, Zhang YS, Gao ZZ (2015) An active learning Kriging model for hybrid reliability analysis with both random and interval variables. Struct Multidiscip Optim 51(5):1003–1016MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  43. Yang XF, Liu YS, Fang XY, Mi CY (2018) Estimation of low failure probability based on active learning Kriging model with a concentric ring approaching strategy. Struct Multidiscip Optim 58(3):1175–1186MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  44. Yun WY, Lu ZZ, Jiang X (2018a) An efficient reliability analysis method combining adaptive Kriging and modified importance sampling for small failure probability. Struct Multidiscip Optim 58(4):1383–1393MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  45. Yun WY, Lu ZZ, Jiang X (2018b) A modified importance sampling method for structural reliability and its global reliability sensitivity analysis. Struct Multidiscip Optim 57(6):1625–1641MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhang LG, Lu ZZ, Wang P (2015) Efficient structural reliability analysis method based on advanced Kriging model. Appl Math Model 39(2):781–793MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang Y, Kim NH, Haftka RT (2019) General surrogate adaptive sampling using interquartile range for design space exploration. AIAA Scitech 2019 Forum.  https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2019-2213
  48. Zheng PJ, Wang CM, Zong ZH, Wang LQ (2017) A new active learning method based on the learning function U of the AK-MCS reliability analysis method. Eng Struct 148:185–194Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringBayero UniversityKanoNigeria

Personalised recommendations