journal article·2021-10-21Open access

Faster Post-Earthquake Damage Assessment Based on 1D Convolutional Neural Networks

Xinzhe Yuan, Dustin Tanksley, Liujun Li, Haibin Zhang, Genda Chen, Donald Wunsch

Applied Sciences· Volume 11· Issue 21

Abstract

Contemporary deep learning approaches for post-earthquake damage assessments based on 2D convolutional neural networks (CNNs) require encoding of ground motion records to transform their inherent 1D time series to 2D images, thus requiring high computing time and resources. This study develops a 1D CNN model to avoid the costly 2D image encoding. The 1D CNN model is compared with a 2D CNN model with wavelet transform encoding and a feedforward neural network (FNN) model to evaluate prediction performance and computational efficiency. A case study of a benchmark reinforced concrete (r/c) building indicated that the 1D CNN model achieved a prediction accuracy of 81.0%, which was very close to the 81.6% prediction accuracy of the 2D CNN model and much higher than the 70.8% prediction accuracy of the FNN model. At the same time, the 1D CNN model reduced computing time by more than 90% and reduced resources used by more than 69%, as compared to the 2D CNN model. Therefore, the developed 1D CNN model is recommended for rapid and accurate resultant damage assessment after earthquakes.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring · Seismic Performance and Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering Department, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409, USA

Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, MO 65409, USA

References (62)

Show source-provided references
1. Probabilistic Basis for 2000 SAC Federal Emergency Management Agency Steel Moment Frame Guidelines10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(2002)128:4(526) ↗
2. Incremental dynamic analysis10.1002/eqe.141 ↗
3. Alternative non-linear demand estimation methods for probability-based seismic assessments10.1002/eqe.876 ↗
4. Vector-valued intensity measures for pulse-like near-fault ground motions10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.07.009 ↗
5. A vector-valued ground motion intensity measure consisting of spectral acceleration and epsilon10.1002/eqe.474 ↗
6. Analytical fragility assessment using unscaled ground motion records10.1002/eqe.2922 ↗
7. Cloud-IDA-MSA conversion of fragility curves for efficient and high-fidelity resilience assessment10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002998 ↗
8. Jalayer, F., Elefante, L., De Risi, R., and Manfredi, G. (2014, January 21–25). Cloud Analysis revisited: Efficient fragility calculation and uncertainty propagation using simple linear regression. Proceedings of the NCEE 2014—10th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering, Anchorage, AK, USA.
9. Cloud to IDA: Efficient fragility assessment with limited scaling10.1002/eqe.3009 ↗
10. Comparing the adequacy of alternative ground motion intensity measures for the estimation of structural responses10.1002/eqe.386 ↗
11. Do seismic intensity measures (IMs) measure up?10.1016/j.probengmech.2016.09.002 ↗
12. Kostinakis, K., Papadopoulos, M., and Athanatopoulou-Kyriakou, A. (2014, January 28–29). Adequacy of advanced earthquake intensity measures for estimation of damage under seismic excitation with arbitrary orientation. Proceedings of the CCSEE 2014: International Conference on Civil, Structural and Earthquake Engineering, Paris, France.
13. On Ground Motion Intensity Indices10.1193/1.2424748 ↗
14. Influence of intensity measure selection on simulation-based regional seismic risk assessment10.1177/8755293019891717 ↗
15. Kostinakis, K., and Morfidis, K. (2020). Application of Artificial Neural Networks for the Assessment of the Seismic Damage of Buildings with Irregular Infills’ Distribution. Geotech. Geol. Earthq. Eng., 291–306.10.1007/978-3-030-33532-8_23 ↗
16. Morfidis, K., and Kostinakis, K. (2019). Comparative evaluation of MFP and RBF neural networks’ ability for instant estimation of r/c buildings’ seismic damage level. Eng. Struct., 197.10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.109436 ↗
17. Approaches to the rapid seismic damage prediction of r/c buildings using artificial neural networks10.1016/j.engstruct.2018.03.028 ↗
18. Xu, Y., Lu, X., Tian, Y., and Huang, Y. (2020). Real-Time Seismic Damage Prediction and Comparison of Various Ground Motion Intensity Measures Based on Machine Learning. J. Earthq. Eng., 1–21.10.2749/christchurch.2021.1158 ↗
19. Selection of optimal intensity measures in probabilistic seismic demand models of highway bridge portfolios10.1002/eqe.782 ↗
20. Optimal intensity measures for probabilistic seismic demand modeling of extended pile-shaft-supported bridges in liquefied and laterally spreading ground10.1007/s10518-017-0199-2 ↗
21. Correlation between ground motion intensity measures and seismic damage of 3D R/C buildings10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.10.035 ↗
22. Ground Motion-Dependent Rapid Damage Assessment of Structures Based on Wavelet Transform and Image Analysis Techniques10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002793 ↗
23. A deep learning approach to rapid regional post-event seismic damage assessment using time-frequency distributions of ground motions10.1002/eqe.3415 ↗
24. Deep Transfer Learning and Time-Frequency Characteristics-Based Identification Method for Structural Seismic Response10.3389/fbuil.2021.627058 ↗
25. Encoding Time-Series Ground Motions as Images for Convolutional Neural Networks-Based Seismic Damage Evaluation10.3389/fbuil.2021.660103 ↗
26. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition10.1109/5.726791 ↗
27. Permutation Coding Technique for Image Recognition Systems10.1109/TNN.2006.880676 ↗
28. Li, L., Fan, Y., Huang, X., and Tian, L. (2016, January 17–20). Real-time UAV weed scout for selective weed control by adaptive robust control and machine learning algorithm. Proceedings of the 2016 American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers Annual International Meeting, ASABE, Orlando, FL, USA.
29. Quantitative Classification of Near-Fault Ground Motions Using Wavelet Analysis10.1785/0120060255 ↗
30. Evaluation of earthquake-induced structural damages by wavelet transform10.1016/j.pnsc.2008.09.002 ↗
31. Detection of pulse-like ground motions based on continues wavelet transform10.1007/s10950-010-9193-8 ↗
32. Debayle, J., Hatami, N., and Gavet, Y. (2018, January 13). Classification of time-series images using deep convolutional neural networks. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Machine Vision, 2017, Vienna, Austria.10.1117/12.2309486 ↗
33. Wang, Z., and Oates, T. (2015, January 25–26). Encoding time series as images for visual inspection and classification using tiled convolutional neural networks. Proceedings of the Workshops at the 29th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Austin, TX, USA.
34. Dau, H.A., Bagnall, A., Kamgar, K., Yeh, C.C.M., Zhu, Y., Gharghabi, S., Ratanamahatana, C.A., and Keogh, E. (2021, April 20). UCR Time Series Classification Archive. Available online: https://www.cs.ucr.edu/~eamonn/time_series_data/.
35. End-to-end environmental sound classification using a 1D convolutional neural network10.1016/j.eswa.2019.06.040 ↗
36. Real-time vibration-based structural damage detection using one-dimensional convolutional neural networks10.1016/j.jsv.2016.10.043 ↗
37. Kiranyaz, S., Ince, T., Abdeljaber, O., Avci, O., and Gabbouj, M. (2019, January 12–17). 1-D convolutional neural networks for signal processing applications. Proceedings of the ICASSP 2019–2019 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), Brighton, UK.10.1109/ICASSP.2019.8682194 ↗
38. 1D convolutional neural networks and applications: A survey10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.107398 ↗
39. PyWavelets: A Python package for wavelet analysis10.21105/joss.01237 ↗
40. Li, Y., and Yuan, Y. (2017, January 4–9). Convergence analysis of two-layer neural networks with RELU activation. Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2017), Long Beach, CA, USA.
41. Deep Learning-Based Crack Damage Detection Using Convolutional Neural Networks10.1111/mice.12263 ↗
42. Pang, T., Xu, K., Dong, Y., Du, C., Chen, N., and Zhu, J. (2019). Rethinking softmax cross-entropy loss for adversarial robustness. arXiv.
43. You, Y., Gitman, I., and Ginsburg, B. (2017). Large batch training of convolutional networks. arXiv.
44. Ruder, S. (2016). An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms. arXiv.
45. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2015, January 7–9). Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA.
46. On time-step in structural seismic response analysis under ground displacement/acceleration10.1007/s11803-009-8126-4 ↗
47. Dropout: A simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting
48. Haykin, S. (2021, October 08). Neural Networks and Learning Machines. Available online: http://plaza.ufl.edu/angelbar/courses/CAP6615_SPRING2012.pdf.
49. Haselton, C.B., Goulet, C.A., Mitrani-Reiser, J., Beck, J.L., Deierlein, G.G., Porter, K.A., Stewart, J.P., and Taciroglu, E. (2008). An assessment to benchmark the seismic performance of a code-conforming reinforced concrete moment-frame building. Peer Rep., Available online: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/33801/1/web_PEER712_HASELTONetal.pdf.
50. Mazzoni, S., McKenna, F., Scott, M.H., and Fenves, G.L. (2006). OpenSees command language manual. Pac. Earthq. Eng. Res. Cent., Available online: file:///C:/Users/MDPI/AppData/Local/Temp/OpenSeesCommandLanguageManualJune2006.pdf.
51. (2021, April 15). Concrete02 Material–Linear Tension Softening-OpenSeesWiki n.d. Available online: https://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Concrete02_Material_--_Linear_Tension_Softening.
52. (2021, April 15). Steel02 Material—Giuffré-Menegotto-Pinto Model with Isotropic Strain Hardening-OpenSeesWiki n.d. Available online: https://opensees.berkeley.edu/wiki/index.php/Steel02_Material_--_Giuffré-Menegotto-Pinto_Model_with_Isotropic_Strain_Hardening.
53. Machine learning-based approaches for seismic demand and collapse of ductile reinforced concrete building frames10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101905 ↗
54. Classifying earthquake damage to buildings using machine learning10.1177/8755293019878137 ↗
55. Applied Technology Council (ATC) (2021, October 08). ATC-20: Procedures for Post-Earthquake Safety Evaluation of Buildings. Available online: https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/23/008/23008479.pdf.
56. Applied Technology Council (2021, October 08). ATC 40 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings Redwood City California. Seism Saf Commisionsion., Available online: https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkozje))/reference/referencespapers.aspx?referenceid=1701260.
57. Three Proposals for Characterizing MDOF Nonlinear Seismic Response10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1998)124:11(1281) ↗
58. Does amplitude scaling of ground motion records result in biased nonlinear structural drift responses?10.1002/eqe.695 ↗
59. Simplified approaches for Arias Intensity correction of synthetic accelerograms10.1007/s10518-017-0126-6 ↗
60. (2021, April 15). TensorFlow n.d. Available online: https://www.tensorflow.org/.
61. Evaluation: From precision, recall and f-measure to roc, informedness, markedness & correlation
62. Survey of clustering algorithms10.1109/TNN.2005.845141 ↗