Advertisement

On a Grey Box Modelling Framework for Nonlinear System Identification

  • T. J. RogersEmail author
  • G. R. Holmes
  • E. J. Cross
  • K. Worden
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

In machine learning, black box models are often used to make excellent predictions of system behaviour. They are especially useful where the physics of a system is unknown or hard to model. This paper examines whether prior knowledge of certain physical properties of a system, encoded in a white box model, can be incorporated into black box methods to improve predictive performance. A combination of genetic algorithm optimisation of the white box model and Gaussian process regression on the residual error is presented as an improved method for system identification. This approach retains physical insight into the behaviour of the system while also reducing the error. Comparisons are made between pure white and black box models and the combined grey box model for several test applications. It is found that the combined model has significant advantages in predictive accuracy. This is especially seen in the case of nonlinear models. Here the full physics of the system is often too complicated or inaccessible to be modelled accurately with a white box method, but also the state space relationships are sufficiently complicated to make black box modelling equally challenging. The use of the proposed grey box method can reduce the complexity of the relationship that the black box is attempting to represent, leading to gains in accuracy. As a bonus, training time is reduced, as less complicated techniques are required to identify the process accurately.

Keywords

Nonlinear system identification White box Black box Grey box Gaussian processes 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Ramboll for providing funding for this work and in particular Ulf Tyge Tygesen whom they are working with directly.

References

  1. 1.
    Kerschen, G., Worden, K., Vakakis, A., Golinval, J.: Past, present and future of nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 20 (3), 505–592 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Noël, J., Kerschen, G.: 10 years of advances in nonlinear system identification in structural dynamics: a review. In: Proceedings of ISMA 2016-International Conference on Noise and Vibration Engineering (2016)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sjoberg, J., Zhang, Q., Ljung, L., Benveniste, A., Delyon, B., Glorennec, P., Hjalmarsson, H., Juditsky, A., et al.: Nonlinear black-box modeling in system-identification-a unified overview. Automatica 31 (12), 1691–1724 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nelles, O.: Nonlinear System Identification: from Classical Approaches to Neural Networks and Fuzzy Models. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin (2013)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hawkins, D.: The problem of overfitting. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 44 (1), 1–12 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bishop, C.: Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics), 1st edn. 2006, Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schmidhuber, J.: Deep learning in neural networks: an overview. Neural Netw. 61, 85–117 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rasmussen, C., Williams, C.: Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Worden, K.: Is system identification just machine learning? Workshop on Nonlinear System Identification Benchmarks (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tulleken, H.J.: Grey-box modelling and identification using physical knowledge and Bayesian techniques. Automatica 29 (2), 285–308 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bohlin, T.: A case study of grey box identification. Automatica 30 (2), 307–318 (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schoukens, M., Mattsson, P., Wigren, T., Noël, J.P.: Cascaded tanks benchmark combining soft and hard nonlinearities (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Storn, R., Price, K.: Differential evolution - a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J. Glob. Optim. 11 (4), 341–359 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eberhart, K.J., et al.: A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Micro Machine and Human Science, vol. 1, pp. 39–43, New York, NY (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malik, R., Rahman, T., Hashim, S., Ngah, R.: New particle swarm optimizer with sigmoid increasing inertia weight. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Secur. 1 (2), 35–44 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sun, J., Feng, B., Xu, W.: Particle swarm optimization with particles having quantum behavior. Congress on Evolutionary Computation (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gandomi, A., Alavi, A.: Krill herd: a new bio-inspired optimization algorithm. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 17 (12), 4831–4845 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hofmann, E., Haskell, E., Klinck, J., Lascara, C.: Lagrangian modelling studies of Antarctic krill (Euphausia Superba) swarm formation. ICES J. Mar. Sci. J. du Conseil 61 (4), 617–631 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Worden, K., Manson, G., Cross, E.: Higher-order frequency response functions from Gaussian process NARX models. In: Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Noise and Vibration Engineering, Leuven (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fletcher, R., Reeves, C.: Function minimization by conjugate gradients. Comput. J. 7 (2), 149–154 (1964)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dai, Y., Yuan, Y.: A nonlinear conjugate gradient method with a strong global convergence property. SIAM J. Optim. 10 (1), 177–182 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. J. Rogers
    • 1
    Email author
  • G. R. Holmes
    • 1
  • E. J. Cross
    • 1
  • K. Worden
    • 1
  1. 1.Dynamics Research Group, Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations