IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i5p1214-d1085023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Solution-Space-Reduction-Based Evidence Theory Method for Stiffness Evaluation of Air Springs with Epistemic Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Shengwen Yin

    (Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track, Ministry of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China)

  • Keliang Jin

    (Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track, Ministry of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China)

  • Yu Bai

    (Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track, Ministry of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China)

  • Wei Zhou

    (Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track, Ministry of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China)

  • Zhonggang Wang

    (Key Laboratory of Traffic Safety on Track, Ministry of Education, School of Traffic & Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, China)

Abstract

In the Dempster–Shafer evidence theory framework, extremum analysis, which should be repeatedly executed for uncertainty quantification (UQ), produces a heavy computational burden, particularly for a high-dimensional uncertain system with multiple joint focal elements. Although the polynomial surrogate can be used to reduce computational expenses, the size of the solution space hampers the efficiency of extremum analysis. To address this, a solution-space-reduction-based evidence theory method (SSR-ETM) is proposed in this paper. The SSR-ETM invests minimal additional time for potentially high-efficiency returns in dealing with epistemic uncertainty. In the SSR-ETM, monotonicity analysis of the polynomial surrogate over the range of evidence variables is first performed. Thereafter, the solution space can be narrowed to a smaller size to accelerate extremum analysis if the surrogate model is at least monotonic in one dimension. Four simple functions and an air spring system with epistemic uncertainty demonstrated the efficacy of the SSR-ETM, indicating an apparent superiority over the conventional method.

Suggested Citation

  • Shengwen Yin & Keliang Jin & Yu Bai & Wei Zhou & Zhonggang Wang, 2023. "Solution-Space-Reduction-Based Evidence Theory Method for Stiffness Evaluation of Air Springs with Epistemic Uncertainty," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:5:p:1214-:d:1085023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/5/1214/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/5/1214/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sudret, Bruno, 2008. "Global sensitivity analysis using polynomial chaos expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 93(7), pages 964-979.
    2. Zhang, Z. & Jiang, C. & Wang, G.G. & Han, X., 2015. "First and second order approximate reliability analysis methods using evidence theory," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 40-49.
    3. Xiaoyan Su & Sankaran Mahadevan & Peida Xu & Yong Deng, 2015. "Dependence Assessment in Human Reliability Analysis Using Evidence Theory and AHP," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1296-1316, July.
    4. Zhang, Jian & Gong, Weijie & Yue, Xinxin & Shi, Maolin & Chen, Lei, 2022. "Efficient reliability analysis using prediction-oriented active sparse polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    5. Oladyshkin, S. & Nowak, W., 2012. "Data-driven uncertainty quantification using the arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 179-190.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Shang, Xiaobing & Su, Li & Fang, Hai & Zeng, Bowen & Zhang, Zhi, 2023. "An efficient multi-fidelity Kriging surrogate model-based method for global sensitivity analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    2. Keshtegar, Behrooz & Chakraborty, Subrata, 2018. "An efficient-robust structural reliability method by adaptive finite-step length based on Armijo line search," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 195-206.
    3. Mathpati, Yogesh Chandrakant & More, Kalpesh Sanjay & Tripura, Tapas & Nayek, Rajdip & Chakraborty, Souvik, 2023. "MAntRA: A framework for model agnostic reliability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    4. Sarat Sivaprasad & Cameron A. MacKenzie, 2018. "The Hurwicz Decision Rule’s Relationship to Decision Making with the Triangle and Beta Distributions and Exponential Utility," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 139-153, September.
    5. Kröker, Ilja & Oladyshkin, Sergey, 2022. "Arbitrary multi-resolution multi-wavelet-based polynomial chaos expansion for data-driven uncertainty quantification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    6. Oladyshkin, Sergey & Nowak, Wolfgang, 2018. "Incomplete statistical information limits the utility of high-order polynomial chaos expansions," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 137-148.
    7. Dawei Zhang & Weilin Li & Xiaohua Wu & Tie Liu, 2018. "An Efficient Regional Sensitivity Analysis Method Based on Failure Probability with Hybrid Uncertainty," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, June.
    8. Yao, Wen & Zheng, Xiaohu & Zhang, Jun & Wang, Ning & Tang, Guijian, 2023. "Deep adaptive arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion: A mini-data-driven semi-supervised method for uncertainty quantification," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    9. Zhang, Jian & Gong, Weijie & Yue, Xinxin & Shi, Maolin & Chen, Lei, 2022. "Efficient reliability analysis using prediction-oriented active sparse polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    10. Xie, Qimiao & Wang, Jinhui & Lu, Shouxiang & Hensen, Jan L.M., 2016. "An optimization method for the distance between exits of buildings considering uncertainties based on arbitrary polynomial chaos expansion," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 188-196.
    11. Thapa, Mishal & Missoum, Samy, 2022. "Uncertainty quantification and global sensitivity analysis of composite wind turbine blades," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    12. Wang, Zihan & Daeipour, Mohamad & Xu, Hongyi, 2023. "Quantification and propagation of Aleatoric uncertainties in topological structures," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    13. Wen, Tao & Gao, Qiuya & Chen, Yu-wang & Cheong, Kang Hao, 2022. "Exploring the vulnerability of transportation networks by entropy: A case study of Asia–Europe maritime transportation network," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    14. Sun, Alexander Y., 2020. "Optimal carbon storage reservoir management through deep reinforcement learning," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(C).
    15. Xu, Jun & Wang, Ding, 2019. "Structural reliability analysis based on polynomial chaos, Voronoi cells and dimension reduction technique," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 329-340.
    16. Matieyendou Lamboni, 2020. "Uncertainty quantification: a minimum variance unbiased (joint) estimator of the non-normalized Sobol’ indices," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 1939-1970, October.
    17. Daniel Harenberg & Stefano Marelli & Bruno Sudret & Viktor Winschel, 2019. "Uncertainty quantification and global sensitivity analysis for economic models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 10(1), pages 1-41, January.
    18. David Breitenmoser & Francesco Cerutti & Gernot Butterweck & Malgorzata Magdalena Kasprzak & Sabine Mayer, 2023. "Emulator-based Bayesian inference on non-proportional scintillation models by compton-edge probing," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    19. Wang, Zequn & Wang, Pingfeng, 2015. "A double-loop adaptive sampling approach for sensitivity-free dynamic reliability analysis," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 346-356.
    20. Wang, Zeyu & Shafieezadeh, Abdollah, 2020. "Real-time high-fidelity reliability updating with equality information using adaptive Kriging," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:5:p:1214-:d:1085023. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.