4.7 Article

Bayesian model updating of a coupled-slab system using field test data utilizing an enhanced Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation algorithm

期刊

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
卷 102, 期 -, 页码 144-155

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.08.005

关键词

Bayesian model updating; Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation; Model class; Field test

资金

  1. Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China [9041758 (CityU 110012)]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulation is applied for model updating of the coupled-slab system of a building structure based on field test data following the Bayesian theory. It is found that the identifiability of the model updating problem depends very much on the complexity of the class of models. By MCMC, the same algorithm can be used no matter the model updating problem is locally identifiable or not. The posterior joint probability density function (PDF) of model parameters is derived with consideration of the uncertainties from both the measurement noise and modeling error. To obtain a posterior PDF that is not analytically available in the complicated parameter space, an MCMC algorithm is proposed to sample a set of models in high-probability regions for the representation (or approximation) of the posterior PDF. The sampling process is divided into multiple levels, and individual bridge PDFs are constructed at each level that finally converged to the target posterior PDF. The samples move smoothly through each level and finally arrive at the important region of the target posterior PDF. A novel stopping criterion for the MCMC algorithm is proposed from the insight of the derivation of the posterior PDF. In the field test verification, the posterior marginal PDFs conditional on two model classes are obtained by the proposed MCMC algorithm, which provide valuable information about the identifiability of different model parameters. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据