Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study
Abstract While many structural damage detection methods have been developed in recent decades, few data‐driven methods in unsupervised learning mode have been developed to solve the practical difficulties in data acquisition for civil infrastructures in different scenarios. To address such a challen...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Engineering Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12551 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832576598612639744 |
|---|---|
| author | Zilong Wang Young‐Jin Cha |
| author_facet | Zilong Wang Young‐Jin Cha |
| author_sort | Zilong Wang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract While many structural damage detection methods have been developed in recent decades, few data‐driven methods in unsupervised learning mode have been developed to solve the practical difficulties in data acquisition for civil infrastructures in different scenarios. To address such a challenge, this article proposes a number of improved unsupervised novelty detection methods and conducts extensive comparative studies on a laboratory scale steel bridge to examine their performances of damage detection. The key concept behind unsupervised novelty detection in this article is that only normal data from undamaged/baseline structural scenarios are required to train statistical models with these methods. Then, these trained models are used to identify abnormal testing data from damaged scenarios. To detect structural damage in the form of loosening bolts in the steel bridge, four machine‐learning methods (i.e., K‐nearest neighbors method, Gaussian mixture models, one‐class support vector machines, density peaks‐based fast clustering method) and one deep learning method using a deep auto‐encoder are selected. Meanwhile, some modifications and improvements are made to enable these methods to detect structural damage in unsupervised novelty detection mode. In their comparative studies, the advantages and disadvantages of these methods are analyzed based on their results of structural damage detection. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-189a1b03946e4ea088118bdbba174ded |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2577-8196 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Engineering Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-189a1b03946e4ea088118bdbba174ded2025-01-31T00:22:48ZengWileyEngineering Reports2577-81962025-01-0171n/an/a10.1002/eng2.12551Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative studyZilong Wang0Young‐Jin Cha1Suzhou Institute of Building Science Group Suzhou Jiangsu ChinaDepartment of Civil Engineering University of Manitoba Winnipeg Manitoba CanadaAbstract While many structural damage detection methods have been developed in recent decades, few data‐driven methods in unsupervised learning mode have been developed to solve the practical difficulties in data acquisition for civil infrastructures in different scenarios. To address such a challenge, this article proposes a number of improved unsupervised novelty detection methods and conducts extensive comparative studies on a laboratory scale steel bridge to examine their performances of damage detection. The key concept behind unsupervised novelty detection in this article is that only normal data from undamaged/baseline structural scenarios are required to train statistical models with these methods. Then, these trained models are used to identify abnormal testing data from damaged scenarios. To detect structural damage in the form of loosening bolts in the steel bridge, four machine‐learning methods (i.e., K‐nearest neighbors method, Gaussian mixture models, one‐class support vector machines, density peaks‐based fast clustering method) and one deep learning method using a deep auto‐encoder are selected. Meanwhile, some modifications and improvements are made to enable these methods to detect structural damage in unsupervised novelty detection mode. In their comparative studies, the advantages and disadvantages of these methods are analyzed based on their results of structural damage detection.https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12551deep learningfast clusteringmachine‐learningstructural damage detectionunsupervised novelty detection |
| spellingShingle | Zilong Wang Young‐Jin Cha Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study Engineering Reports deep learning fast clustering machine‐learning structural damage detection unsupervised novelty detection |
| title | Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study |
| title_full | Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study |
| title_fullStr | Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study |
| title_short | Unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection: A comparative study |
| title_sort | unsupervised machine and deep learning methods for structural damage detection a comparative study |
| topic | deep learning fast clustering machine‐learning structural damage detection unsupervised novelty detection |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/eng2.12551 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zilongwang unsupervisedmachineanddeeplearningmethodsforstructuraldamagedetectionacomparativestudy AT youngjincha unsupervisedmachineanddeeplearningmethodsforstructuraldamagedetectionacomparativestudy |