| Literature DB >> 29576691 |
Haibin Li1, Yun He1, Xiaobo Nie1.
Abstract
Structural reliability analysis under uncertainty is paid wide attention by engineers and scholars due to reflecting the structural characteristics and the bearing actual situation. The direct integration method, started from the definition of reliability theory, is easy to be understood, but there are still mathematics difficulties in the calculation of multiple integrals. Therefore, a dual neural network method is proposed for calculating multiple integrals in this paper. Dual neural network consists of two neural networks. The neural network A is used to learn the integrand function, and the neural network B is used to simulate the original function. According to the derivative relationships between the network output and the network input, the neural network B is derived from the neural network A. On this basis, the performance function of normalization is employed in the proposed method to overcome the difficulty of multiple integrations and to improve the accuracy for reliability calculations. The comparisons between the proposed method and Monte Carlo simulation method, Hasofer-Lind method, the mean value first-order second moment method have demonstrated that the proposed method is an efficient and accurate reliability method for structural reliability problems.Entities:
Keywords: Direct integral method; Dual neural network; Rational neural network; Reliability
Year: 2016 PMID: 29576691 PMCID: PMC5857287 DOI: 10.1007/s00521-016-2554-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neural Comput Appl ISSN: 0941-0643 Impact factor: 5.606
Fig. 1Structure of original function network B
Fig. 2Structure of integrand network A
Training sample set of network A in example 1
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| −10 | −9.6 | −9.2 | … | 29.6 | 30 | |
| −10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.0983e−8 | 0.0716e−8 |
| −9.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.1350e−8 | 0.0983e−8 |
| −9.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.1841e−8 | 0.1341e−8 |
| … | … | … | … | … | … | … |
| 29.6 | 0.0983e−8 | 0.1350e−8 | 0.1841e−8 | … | 0.1350e−8 | 0.0983e−8 |
| 30 | 0.0716e−8 | 0.0983e−8 | 0.1341e−8 | … | 0.0983e−8 | 0.0716e−8 |
Fig. 3Training error curve of network A in example 1
Simulative sample set of network B in example 1
|
| 30 | 30 | −10 | −10 |
|
| 30 | −10 | 30 | −10 |
Results calculated using different method
| Methods | The proposed method | MVFOSM | HL | MCS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 0.9966 | 0.8249 | 0.9875 | 0.9945 |
| Relative error (%) | 0.21 | 17.05 | 0.7 | 0 |
Fig. 4Plane frame structure
Training sample set of network A in example 2
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0 | 0.8 | 1.6 | … | 7.2 | 8.0 | |
| −0.2 e−7 | 0.2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.0021e−6 | 0.0008e−6 |
| −0.2 e−7 | 0.36 | 0 | 0 | 0.0003e−6 | … | 0.0376e−8 | 0.0135e−6 |
| −0.2 e−7 | 0.52 | 0 | 0 | 0.0024e−6 | … | 0.3529e−6 | 0.1273e−6 |
| … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … |
| −0.2 e−7 | 1.64 | 0 | 0 | 0.0003e−6 | … | 0.0376e−6 | 0.0135e−6 |
| −0.2 e−7 | 1.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.0021e−6 | 0.0008e−6 |
| … | … | … | … | … | … | … | … |
| 4 | 1.64 | 0 | 0 | 0.0003e−6 | … | 0.0376e−6 | 0.0135e−6 |
| 4 | 1.8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | … | 0.0021e−6 | 0.0008e−6 |
Fig. 5Training error curve of network A (average divide to 10)
Simulative sample set of network B in example 2
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
|
| 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 1.8 |
Fig. 6Training error curve of network A (average divide to 20)
Example 2 reliability calculation results
| Method | The proposed method (divided into 10 parts) | The proposed method (divided into 20 parts) | MVFOSM | HL | MCS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reliability | 0.9696 | 0.9845 | 0.9956 | 0.9996 | 0.9993 |
| Relative error (%) | 2.972 | 1.481 | 0.37 | 0.03 | 0 |