Structural health monitoring plays an increasingly significant role in detecting damages for large and complex structures to ensure their serviceability and sustainability. Optimal sensor placement is critical in the structural health monitoring system as the sensor configuration directly impacts the quality of collected data used for structural health diagnosis. Therefore, this study presents a comprehensive review of computational methodologies for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring. The problem formulation of optimal sensor placement is first introduced, including commonly used evaluation criteria for sensor configurations. Then, various existing optimization methodologies for sensor placement are summarized and introduced in detail, especially for the evolutionary algorithms and their improved variants. Finally, the suitability of computational methods for specific structural health monitoring applications is also discussed. The main goal of this study is to deliver a comprehensive reference of computational methodologies for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring studies and applications. This article is concluded by highlighting the most widely utilized evaluation criteria and optimization methodologies for sensor configuration determination.
SohnHFarrarCRHemezFM, et al. A review of structural health monitoring literature: 1996–2001. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 2003.
2.
BalageasDFritzenCPGüemesA. Structural health monitoring. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
3.
FarrarCRWordenK. An introduction to structural health monitoring. Philos T Roy Soc A2007; 365(1851): 303–315.
4.
BrownjohnJM. Structural health monitoring of civil infrastructure. Philos T Roy Soc2007; 365(1851): 589–622.
5.
KarbhariVMAnsariF. Structural health monitoring of civil infrastructure systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2009.
6.
OuJLiH. Structural health monitoring in mainland China: review and future trends. Struct Health Monit2010; 9(3): 219–231.
7.
AbbottEAScottML. Optimal design of fibre composite structures with embedded sensor systems. In: TzouHSAndersonGLGuranA. (eds) Smart structures, devices, and systems, vol. 4935. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2002, pp. 41–51.
8.
TurkanYBoscheFHaasCT, et al. Automated progress tracking using 4D schedule and 3D sensing technologies. Automat Constr2012; 22: 414–421.
9.
PanYZhangLLiZ, et al. Improved fuzzy Bayesian network-based risk analysis with interval-valued fuzzy sets and D-S evidence theory. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst2019; 1–14.
10.
ZhangLDingLWuX, et al. An improved Dempster–Shafer approach to construction safety risk perception. Knowl-Based Syst2017; 132: 30–46.
11.
PanYZhangLWuX, et al. Structural health monitoring and assessment using wavelet packet energy spectrum. Safety Sci2019; 120: 652–665.
12.
GhayvatHMukhopadhyaySGuiX, et al. WSN-and IOT-based smart homes and their extension to smart buildings. Sensors2015; 15(5): 10350–10379.
13.
LiDSLiHN. The state of the art of sensor placement methods in structural health monitoring. In: TomizukaMYunC-BGiurgiutiuV. (eds) Smart structures and materials 2006: sensors and smart structures technologies for civil, mechanical, and aerospace systems, vol. 6174. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2006, pp. 1–1372.
14.
AnsariF. Practical implementation of optical fiber sensors in civil structural health monitoring. J Intel Mat Syst Str2007; 18(8): 879–889.
15.
ChangPCFlatauALiuS. Health monitoring of civil infrastructure. Struct Health Monit2003; 2(3): 257–267.
16.
LynchJP. An overview of wireless structural health monitoring for civil structures. Philos T Roy Soc A2007: 365 (1851); 345–372.
17.
NagayamaTSpencerBFJr.Structural health monitoring using smart sensors. Newmark Structural Engineering Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Champaign, IL, November2007, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/4813669.pdf
18.
LynchJPLohKJ. A summary review of wireless sensors and sensor networks for structural health monitoring. Shock Vib Dig2006; 38(2): 91–130.
19.
FedericiFGraziosiFFaccioM, et al. An integrated approach to the design of wireless sensor networks for structural health monitoring. Int J Distrib Sens N2012; 8(3): 594842.
20.
XuNRangwalaSChintalapudiKK, et al. A wireless sensor network for structural monitoring. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on embedded networked sensor systems, Baltimore, MD, 3–5 November 2004, pp. 13–24. New York: ACM.
21.
JangSJoHChoS, et al. Structural health monitoring of a cable-stayed bridge using smart sensor technology: deployment and evaluation. Smart Mater Struct2010; 6(5–6): 439–459.
22.
AbdollahzadehSNavimipourNJ. Deployment strategies in the wireless sensor network: a comprehensive review. Comput Commun2016; 91–92: 1–16.
23.
MeoMZumpanoG. Optimal sensor placement on a large-scale civil structure. In: WannemacherRPetitLLefeuvreE, et al. (eds) Health monitoring and smart nondestructive evaluation of structural and biological systems III, vol. 5394. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2004, pp. 108–118.
24.
YounisMAkkayaK. Strategies and techniques for node placement in wireless sensor networks: a survey. Ad Hoc Netw2008; 6(4): 621–655.
25.
GuerrieroFVioliANatalizioE, et al. Modelling and solving optimal placement problems in wireless sensor networks. Appl Math Model2011; 35(1): 230–241.
26.
HuangYLudwigSADengF. Sensor optimization using a genetic algorithm for structural health monitoring in harsh environments. J Civ Struct Health Monit2016; 6(3): 509–519.
27.
HuangYLudwigSA. Sensor optimization using an evolutionary strategy for structural health monitoring in high temperature environments. In: SohnH (ed.) Sensors and smart structures technologies for civil, mechanical, and aerospace systems, vol. 10598. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2018, pp. 1–1074.
28.
ChowHMLamHFYinT, et al. Optimal sensor configuration of a typical transmission tower for the purpose of structural model updating. Struct Control Hlth2011; 18(3): 305–320.
29.
BhuiyanMZAWangGCaoJ, et al. Sensor placement with multiple objectives for structural health monitoring. ACM Trans Sens Netw2014; 10(4): 68.
30.
BhuiyanMZAWangGCaoJ, et al. Deploying wireless sensor networks with fault-tolerance for structural health monitoring. IEEE T Comput2015; 64(2): 382–395.
31.
QuarantaGMaranoGCTrentadueF, et al. Numerical study on the optimal sensor placement for historic swing bridge dynamic monitoring. Struct Infrastruct E2014; 10(1): 57–68.
32.
NiYQXiaYLinW, et al. SHM benchmark for high-rise structures: a reduced-order finite element model and field measurement data. Smart Struct Syst2012; 10(4–5): 411–426.
33.
YiTHLiHNGuM. Sensor placement for structural health monitoring of Canton Tower. Smart Struct Syst2012; 10(4–5): 313–329.
34.
StolarskiTNakasoneYYoshimotoS. Engineering analysis with ANSYS software. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2018.
35.
YiTHLiHNZhangXD. Sensor placement on Canton Tower for health monitoring using asynchronous-climb monkey algorithm. Smart Mater Struct2012; 21(12): 125023.
36.
LiBLiDZhaoX, et al. Optimal sensor placement in health monitoring of suspension bridge. Sci China Technol Sc2012; 55(7): 2039–2047.
37.
HeCXingJLiJ, et al. A combined optimal sensor placement strategy for the structural health monitoring of bridge structures. Int J Distrib Sens N2013; 9(11): 820694.
38.
LiuWGaoW-cSunY, et al. Optimal sensor placement for spatial lattice structure based on genetic algorithms. J Sound Vib2008; 317(1–2): 175–189.
39.
XuYLZhangXHZhuS, et al. Multi-type sensor placement and response reconstruction for structural health monitoring of long-span suspension bridges. Sci Bull2016; 61(4): 313–329.
40.
YiTHLiHNZhangXD. Health monitoring sensor placement optimization for Canton Tower using virus monkey algorithm. Smart Struct Syst2015; 15(5): 1373–1392.
41.
ZhangXLiJXingJ, et al. Optimal sensor placement for latticed shell structure based on an improved particle swarm optimization algorithm. Math Probl Eng2014; 2014: 743904.
42.
ZhangLZHuangQWangCH. Optimal sensor placement based on multi-object genetic algorithm. Engineer Mechan2007; 4: 168–172.
43.
MeoMZumpanoG. On the optimal sensor placement techniques for a bridge structure. Eng Struct2005; 27(10): 1488–1497.
44.
GongYLiuHChengY. Optimal placement of static sensors based on damage identification for bridge health monitoring. ICTE2011; 2011: 1804–1810.
45.
SunHBüyüköztürkO. Optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring using discrete optimization. Smart Mater Struct2015; 24(12): 125034.
46.
YiTHLiHNZhangXD. Sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using distributed monkey algorithm. Smart Struct Syst2015; 15(1): 191–207.
47.
LeeJ. Real-time monitoring of landslide using wireless sensor network. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University, 2009.
FidanovaSMarinovPAlbaE. Ant algorithm for optimal sensor deployment. In: MadaniKCorreiaDARosaA, et al. (eds) Computational intelligence. Berlin: Springer, 2012, pp. 21–29.
50.
YiTHLiHNZhangXD. Health monitoring sensor placement optimization for Canton Tower using immune monkey algorithm. Struct Control Hlth2015; 22(1): 123–138.
51.
ThieneMKhodaeiZSAliabadiM. Optimal sensor placement for damage detection based on ultrasonic guided wave. Key Eng Mat2015; 665: 269–272.
52.
BlanloeuilPNurhazliNAVeidtM. Particle swarm optimization for optimal sensor placement in ultrasonic SHM systems. In: ShullPJ (ed.) Nondestructive characterization and monitoring of advanced materials, aerospace, and civil infrastructure 2016, vol. 9804, 2016, pp. 98040E. Bellingham, Washington: SPIE.
53.
FlynnEBToddMD. Bayesian probabilistic structural modeling for optimal sensor placement in ultrasonic guided wave-based structural health monitoring. In: PetersKJEckeWMatikasT. (eds) Smart sensor phenomena, technology, networks, and systems 2010, vol. 7648. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2010, p. 76480Z.
54.
GaoHRoseJ. Ultrasonic sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using evolutionary strategy. AIP Conf Proc2006; 820: 1687–1693.
55.
KhodaeiZSAliabadiM. An optimization strategy for best sensor placement for damage detection and localization in complex composite structures. In: 8th European workshop on structural health monitoring, Bilbao, 5–8 July 2016, pp. 5–8. Red Hook, NY: Curran Associates, Inc.
56.
JinHXiaJWangYQ. Optimal sensor placement for space modal identification of crane structures based on an improved harmony search algorithm. J Zhejiang Univ: Sc A2015; 16(6): 464–477.
57.
PapadimitriouCBeckJLAuSK. Entropy-based optimal sensor location for structural model updating. J Vib Control2000; 6(5): 781–800.
58.
JinHSongY. Sensor placement optimization for damage detection. In: Earth & space 2008: engineering, science, construction, and operations in challenging environments, Long Beach, CA, 3–5March2008, pp. 1–7. Reston, Virginia: ASCE
59.
ChangMPakzadSN. Optimal sensor placement for modal identification of bridge systems considering number of sensing nodes. J Bridge Eng2014; 19(6): 04014019.
60.
RaoAAnandakumarG. Optimal sensor placement techniques for system identification and health monitoring of civil structures. Smart Struct Syst2008; 4(4): 465–492.
61.
CarneTGDohrmannCR. A modal test design strategy for model correlation. Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Labs, 1994.
62.
AllemangRJBrownDL. A correlation coefficient for modal vector analysis. In: Proceedings of the 1st international modal analysis conference, vol. 1, Orlando, FL, 8–10 November 1982, pp. 110–116. Orlando, FL: SEM.
63.
EwinsDJ. Modal testing: theory and practice. Letchworth: Research Studies Press, 1984.
KammerDC. Sensor placement for on-orbit modal identification and correlation of large space structures. J Guid Control Dynam1991; 14(2): 251–259.
66.
KammerDC. Optimal sensor placement for modal identification using system-realization methods. J Guid Control Dynam1996; 19(3): 729–731.
67.
BassevilleMBenvenisteAMoustakidesG, et al. Optimal sensor location for detecting changes in dynamical behavior. IEEE T Automat Contr1987; 32(12): 1067–1075.
68.
PanCT. On the existence and computation of rank-revealing LU factorizations. Linear Algebra Appl2000; 316(1–3): 199–222.
69.
JaynesET. Where do we stand on maximum entropy? In: The maximum entropy formalism, Cambridge, MA, 2–4May1979.
70.
YeSNiY. Information entropy based algorithm of sensor placement optimization for structural damage detection. Smart Struct Syst2012; 10(4_5): 443–458.
71.
PapoulisA. Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965.
WordenKBurrowsA. Optimal sensor placement for fault detection. Eng Struct2001; 23(8): 885–901.
74.
ZhouGDYiTHLiHN. Sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using cluster-in-cluster firefly algorithm. Adv Struct Eng2014; 17(8): 1103–1115.
75.
LiBWangDWangF, et al. High quality sensor placement for SHM systems: refocusing on application demands. In: 2010 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM, San Diego, CA, 14–19March2010, pp. 1–9. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
76.
FuTSGhoshAJohnsonEA, et al. Energy-efficient deployment strategies in structural health monitoring using wireless sensor networks. Struct Control Hlth2013; 20(6): 971–986.
77.
ElsersyMElfoulyTMAhmedMH. Joint optimal placement, routing, and flow assignment in wireless sensor networks for structural health monitoring. IEEE Sens J2016; 16(12): 5095–5106.
78.
MichalewiczZDasguptaDLe RicheRG, et al. Evolutionary algorithms for constrained engineering problems. Comput Ind Eng1996; 30(4): 851–870.
79.
DasguptaDMichalewiczZ. Evolutionary algorithms in engineering applications. Berlin: Springer, 2013.
HollandJH. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992.
82.
HollandJH. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1975.
83.
WhitleyD. A genetic algorithm tutorial. Stat Comput1994; 4(2): 65–85.
84.
DavisL. Handbook of genetic algorithms. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991.
85.
PapadrakakisMPapadopoulosVPlevrisV. Sensor placement optimization using ensemble Kalman filter and genetic algorithm. In: 5th ECCOMAS thematic conference on computational methods in structural dynamics and earthquake engineering, Crete Island, Greece, 25–27 May 2015.
86.
PapadimitriouC. Optimal sensor placement methodology for parametric identification of structural systems. J Sound Vib2004; 278(4–5): 923–947.
87.
GaoHRoseJL. Sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using genetic and evolutionary algorithms. In: TomizukaMYunC-BGiurgiutiuV. (eds) Smart structures and materials 2006: sensors and smart structures technologies for civil, mechanical, and aerospace systems, vol. 6174. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2006, p. 617410.
88.
MarkmillerJFChangFK. Sensor network optimization for a passive sensing impact detection technique. Struct Health Monit2010; 9(1): 25–39.
89.
SomanRNOnoufriouaTKyriakidesbMA, et al. Multi-type, multi-sensor placement optimization for structural health monitoring of long span bridges. Smart Struct Syst2014; 14(1): 55–70.
90.
GomesGFda CunhaSSAlexandrinoPdSL, et al. Sensor placement optimization applied to laminated composite plates under vibration. Struct Multidiscip O2018; 58: 2099–2118.
91.
FlynnEBToddMD. A Bayesian approach to optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring with application to active sensing. Mech Syst Signal Pr2010; 24(4): 891–903.
92.
PapadimitriouCChristodoulouKPavlidouM, et al. Optimal sensor and actuator configuration for structural identification. In: Proceedings of the ASME design engineering technical conference, Pittsburgh, PA, 9–12 September 2001.
93.
YangCLuZYangZ. Robust optimal sensor placement for uncertain structures with interval parameters. IEEE Sens J2018; 18(5): 2031–2041.
94.
LiGQinQDongC. Optimal placement of sensors for monitoring systems on suspension bridges using genetic algorithms. Engineer Mechan2000; 1: 003.
95.
HanLZZhangJQYangY. Optimal placement of sensors for monitoring systems on suspension bridges using genetic algorithms. In: YarlagaddaPChoiS-B. (eds) Applied mechanics and materials, vol. 530–531. Zurich: Trans Tech Publications, 2014, pp. 320–331.
96.
YiTHLiHNGuM. Optimal sensor placement for health monitoring of high-rise structure based on genetic algorithm. Math Probl Eng2011; 2011: 395101.
97.
ZhouGDYiTHLiHN. Wireless sensor placement for bridge health monitoring using a generalized genetic algorithm. Int J Struct Stab Dy2014; 14(05): 1440011.
98.
GuoHZhangLZhangL, et al. Optimal placement of sensors for structural health monitoring using improved genetic algorithms. Smart Mater Struct2004; 13(3): 528–534.
99.
ShanDWanZQiaoL. Optimal sensor placement for long-span railway steel truss cable-stayed bridge. In: 2011 third international conference on measuring technology and mechatronics automation, vol. 2, Shanghai, China, 6–7 January 2011, pp. 795–798. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
100.
VosoughifarHRShokouhiSKDolatshahA, et al. Optimal placement of smart sensors in CFS structures under blast loading using hybrid FEM-GA approach. In: LynchJPYunC-BWangK-W (eds) Sensors and smart structures technologies for civil, mechanical, and aerospace systems 2013, vol. 8692. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2013, p. 869242.
101.
KangFLiJJXuQ. Virus coevolution partheno-genetic algorithms for optimal sensor placement. Adv Eng Inform2008; 22(3): 362–370.
102.
FuYMYuL. Optimal sensor placement based on MAC and SPGA algorithms. In: WangLXuG. (eds) Advanced materials research, vol. 594. Zurich: Trans Tech Publications, 2012, pp. 1118–1122.
103.
ZhanSLHuangFLaiJY. Optimal sensor placement for high-rise building via genetic algorithms and improved information matrix criterion. In: Yang Q (ed.) Advanced materials research, vol. 368. Zurich: Trans Tech Publications, 2012, pp. 1653–1659.
104.
ZhuKGuCQiuJ, et al. Determining the optimal placement of sensors on a concrete arch dam using a quantum genetic algorithm. J Sensors2016; 2016: 1–10.
105.
WuCLLiuHBLiY. Sensor optimal placement for structural health monitoring based on stabilization diagram. In: LiuY (ed.) Key engineering materials, vol. 540. Zurich: Trans Tech Publications, 2013, pp. 47–54.
106.
YiTHZhangXDLiHN. Modified monkey algorithm and its application to the optimal sensor placement. In: ChuMXuHJiaZ, et al. (eds) Applied mechanics and materials, vol. 178. Zurich: Trans Tech Publications, 2012, pp. 2699–2702.
107.
YiTHLiHNZhangXD. A modified monkey algorithm for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring. Smart Mater Struct2012; 21(10): 105033.
108.
YiTHLiHNGuM, et al. Sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using niching monkey algorithm. Int J Struct Stab Dy2014; 14(5): 1440012.
109.
JiaJFengSLiuW. A triaxial accelerometer monkey algorithm for optimal sensor placement in structural health monitoring. Meas Sci Technol2015; 26(6): 065104.
110.
YiTHLiHNSongG, et al. Optimal sensor placement for health monitoring of high-rise structure using adaptive monkey algorithm. Struct Control Hlth2015; 22(4): 667–681.
111.
ZhangFBrezhnevaOShuklaA.Optimal sensor placement using chaotic monkey search algorithm. In: ASME 2015 international design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Boston, MA, 2–5 August 2015.
112.
ZhangXWangPXingJC, et al. Optimal sensor placement of long-span cable-stayed bridges based on particle swarm optimization algorithm. In: WenZLiT. (eds) Practical applications of intelligent systems. Berlin: Springer, 2014, pp. 207–217.
113.
LiJZhangXXingJ, et al. Optimal sensor placement for long-span cable-stayed bridge using a novel particle swarm optimization algorithm. J Civ Struct Health Monit2015; 5(5): 677–685.
114.
ZhaoJWuXSunQ, et al. Optimal sensor placement for a truss structure using particle swarm optimisation algorithm. Int J Acoust Vib2017; 22(4): 439–447.
115.
RaoARMAnandakumarG. Optimal placement of sensors for structural system identification and health monitoring using a hybrid swarm intelligence technique. Smart Mater Struct2007; 16(6): 2658.
116.
WangWLinYCShenXY, et al. Optimal placement of fiber Bragg grating sensors using self-adaptive particle swarm optimization algorithm. J Tianjin Univ2010; 10: 009.
117.
LianJHeLMaB, et al. Optimal sensor placement for large structures using the nearest neighbour index and a hybrid swarm intelligence algorithm. Smart Mater Struct2013; 22(9): 095015.
118.
HeLLianJMaB, et al. Optimal multiaxial sensor placement for modal identification of large structures. Struct Control Hlth2014; 21(1): 61–79.
119.
ZhouGDYiTHZhangH, et al. Energy-aware wireless sensor placement in structural health monitoring using hybrid discrete firefly algorithm. Struct Control Hlth2015; 22(4): 648–666.
120.
ZhouGDYiTHZhangH, et al. A comparative study of genetic and firefly algorithms for sensor placement in structural health monitoring. Shock Vib2015; 2015: 518692.
121.
HaoHZhangC. A multi-objective firefly algorithm for wireless sensor placement in structural health monitoring. In: HaoHZhangC. (eds) Mechanics of structures and materials XXIV. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2016, pp. 1355–1360.
122.
ZhouGDYiTHXieMX, et al. Wireless sensor placement for structural monitoring using information-fusing firefly algorithm. Smart Mater Struct2017; 26(10): 104002.
123.
ChiuPLinFY. A simulated annealing algorithm to support the sensor placement for target location. In: Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering 2004, vol. 2, Niagara Falls, ON, Canada, 2–5 May 2004, pp. 867–870. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
124.
GouXCuiM. Application of genetic and simulated annealing algorithms in placement optimization of sensor/actuator. Mach Electron2008; 11: 39–41.
125.
TongKBakharyNKuehA, et al. Optimal sensor placement for mode shapes using improved simulated annealing. Smart Struct Syst2014; 13(3): 389–406.
126.
WangXMaJJWangS, et al. Distributed particle swarm optimization and simulated annealing for energy-efficient coverage in wireless sensor networks. Sensors2007; 7(5): 628–648.
127.
FengSJiaJQZhangJC. Sensor configuration optimizing in modal identification by siege ant colony algorithm. J Mech2017; 33(2): 269–277.
128.
YiTHLiHNWangCW. Multiaxial sensor placement optimization in structural health monitoring using distributed wolf algorithm. Struct Control Hlth2016; 23(4): 719–734.
AffenzellerMWagnerSWinklerS, et al. Genetic algorithms and genetic programming: modern concepts and practical applications. London: Chapman & Hall, 2009.
131.
RiparbelliMGCallainiG. Drosophila parthenogenesis: a model for de novo centrosome assembly. Dev Biol2003; 260(2): 298–313.
132.
LiMZhuTTongT. Comparison between partheno-genetic algorithm and traditional genetic algorithm. Syst Eng2001; 19(1): 61–65.
133.
MaojunLTiaoshengT. A partheno-genetic algorithm and analysis on its global convergence. Acta Autom Sin1999; 25(1): 68–72.
134.
BaiJcChangHyYiY. A partheno-genetic algorithm for multidimensional knapsack problem. In: Proceedings of 2005 international conference on machine learning and cybernetics, vol. 5, Guangzhou, China, 18–21 August 2005, pp. 2962–2965. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
135.
KubotaNFukudaTShimojimaK. Virus-evolutionary genetic algorithm for a self-organizing manufacturing system. Comput Ind Eng1996; 30(4): 1015–1026.
136.
KubotaNShimojimaKFukudaT. The role of virus infection in virus-evolutionary genetic algorithm. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation, Nagoya, Japan, 20–22 May 1996, pp. 182–187. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
137.
HuSXuXLiX. A virus coevolution genetic algorithm for project optimization scheduling. J Softw2004; 15(1): 49–57.
138.
YangYGuZHuL. The application of virus evolutionary genetic algorithm to dynamic path planning. Automot Eng2007; 29(1): 67–70.
139.
ZhaoRQTangWS. Monkey algorithm for global numerical optimization. J Uncertain Syst2008; 2(3): 165–176.
140.
TavazoeiMSHaeriM. Comparison of different one-dimensional maps as chaotic search pattern in chaos optimization algorithms. Appl Math Comput2007; 187(2): 1076–1085.
141.
GeemZWKimJHLoganathanGV. A new heuristic optimization algorithm: harmony search. Simul2001; 76(2): 60–68.
142.
AndersonNG. Evolutionary significance of virus infection. Nat1970; 227(5265): 1346.
143.
EberhartRKennedyJ. A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. In: Proceedings of the sixth international symposium on micro machine and human science, Nagoya, Japan, 4–6 October 1995, pp. 39–43. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
144.
ShiYEberhartR. A modified particle swarm optimizer. In: 1998 IEEE international conference on evolutionary computation proceedings. IEEE world congress on computational intelligence, Anchorage, AK, 4–9 May 1998, pp. 69–73. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
145.
HuXEberhartR.Multiobjective optimization using dynamic neighborhood particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation, vol. 2, Honolulu, HI, 12–17 May 2002, pp. 1677–1681. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
146.
PeramTVeeramachaneniKMohanCK.Fitness-distance-ratio based particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE swarm intelligence symposium, Indianapolis, IN, 26 April 2003, pp. 174–181. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
147.
MendesRKennedyJNevesJ. The fully informed particle swarm: simpler, maybe better. IEEE T Evolut Comput2004; 8(3): 204–210.
148.
BlackwellTBrankeJ.Multi-swarm optimization in dynamic environments. In: RaidlGRCagnoniSBrankeJ, et al. (eds) Workshops on applications of evolutionary computation. Berlin: Springer, 2004, pp. 489–500.
149.
NelderJAMeadR. A simplex method for function minimization. Comput J1965; 7(4): 308–313.
150.
YangXS. Firefly algorithm, stochastic test functions and design optimisation. Int J Bio-Inspir Com2010; 2(2): 78–84.
151.
YangXS. Firefly algorithm, Levy flights and global optimization. In: BramerMPetridisMHopgoodA. (eds) Research and development in intelligent systems XXVI. Berlin: Springer, 2010, pp. 209–218.
152.
HammingRW. Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell Syst Tech J1950; 29(2): 147–160.
153.
BrownCTLiebovitchLSGlendonR. Lévy flights in Dobe Ju/’hoansi foraging patterns. Hum Ecol2007; 35(1): 129–138.
154.
ReynoldsAMRhodesCJ. The Lévy flight paradigm: random search patterns and mechanisms. Ecology2009; 90(4): 877–887.
155.
GandomiAHYangXSAlaviAH. Cuckoo search algorithm: a metaheuristic approach to solve structural optimization problems. Eng Comput2013; 29(1): 17–35.
156.
MetropolisNRosenbluthAWRosenbluthMN, et al. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J Chem Phys1953; 21(6): 1087–1092.
157.
KirkpatrickSGelattCDVecchiMP. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science1983; 220(4598): 671–680.
158.
StaszewskiWJWordenK. Overview of optimal sensor location methods for damage detection. In: Vittal SR (eds) Smart structures and materials 2001: modeling, signal processing, and control in smart structures, vol. 4326. Bellingham, WA: International Society for Optics and Photonics, 2001, pp. 179–188.
159.
BrownDESchamburgJB. A simulation-optimization methodology for sensor placement. In: 1997 IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics. Computational cybernetics and simulation, vol. 1, Orlando, FL, 12–15 October 1997, pp. 439–443. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
160.
ChattopadhyayASeeleyCE. A simulated annealing technique for multiobjective optimization of intelligent structures. Smart Mater Struct1994; 3(2): 98–106.
161.
HwangSFHeRS. A hybrid real-parameter genetic algorithm for function optimization. Adv Eng Inform2006; 20(1): 7–21.
162.
DorigoMManiezzoVColorniA. Ant system: optimization by a colony of cooperating agents. IEEE T Syst Man Cy B1996; 26(1): 29–41.
163.
YiTHLiHN. Methodology developments in sensor placement for health monitoring of civil infrastructures. Int J Distrib Sens N2012; 8(8): 612726.
164.
StützleTHoosHH. MAX–MIN ant system. Future Gener Comp Sy2000; 16(8): 889–914.
165.
YiTHLiHNGuM. A new method for optimal selection of sensor location on a high-rise building using simplified finite element model. Struct Eng Mech2011; 37(6): 671–684.
166.
YiTHLiHNGuM. Optimal sensor placement for structural health monitoring based on multiple optimization strategies. Struct Des Tall Spec2011; 20(7): 881–900.
167.
ZhangJMaesKDe RoeckG, et al. Optimal sensor placement for multi-setup modal analysis of structures. J Sound Vib2017; 401: 214–232.
PapadimitriouCLombaertG. The effect of prediction error correlation on optimal sensor placement in structural dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Pr2012; 28: 105–127.
170.
LuenbergerDGYeY. Linear and nonlinear programming. Berlin: Springer, 1984.
171.
DeuflhardP. Newton methods for nonlinear problems: affine invariance and adaptive algorithms. Berlin: Springer, 2011.
172.
LingmiLFZ. Advances in optimal placement of actuators and sensors. Adv Mech2000; 4: 002.
173.
BelegunduADAroraJS. A recursive quadratic programming method with active set strategy for optimal design. Int J Numer Meth Eng1984; 20(5): 803–816.
174.
PowellMJYuanY. A recursive quadratic programming algorithm that uses differentiable exact penalty functions. Math Program1986; 35(3): 265–278.
175.
SepulvedaAInIChmitL. Optimal placement of active elements in control augmented structural synthesis. AIAA J1993; 31(10): 1906–1915.
176.
SepulvedaAESchmitLAJr.Optimal placement of actuators and sensors in control-augmented structural optimization. Int J Numer Meth Eng1991; 32(6): 1165–1187.
177.
SunarMRaoS. Thermopiezoelectric control design. AIAA J1997; 35(3): 534–539.
178.
CapellariGChatziEMarianiS. An optimal sensor placement method for SHM based on Bayesian experimental design and polynomial chaos expansion. In: European congress on computational methods in applied sciences and engineering, Crete Island, Greece, 5–10June2016, pp. 6272–6282. Athens, Greece: National Technical University of Athens.
179.
YuenKVKatafygiotisLSPapadimitriouC, et al. Optimal sensor placement methodology for identification with unmeasured excitation. J Dyn Syst2001; 123(4): 677–686.
180.
AzarbayejaniMEl-OseryAChoiK, et al. A probabilistic approach for optimal sensor allocation in structural health monitoring. Smart Mater Struct2008; 17(5): 055019.
181.
GuratzschRF. Sensor placement optimization under uncertainty for structural health monitoring systems of hot aerospace structures. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, 2007.
182.
HuyerWNeumaierA. SNOBFIT—stable noisy optimization by branch and fit. ACM T Math Software2008; 35(2): 9.
183.
GuratzschRFMahadevanS. Structural health monitoring sensor placement optimization under uncertainty. AIAA J2010; 48(7): 1281–1289.
184.
GuratzschRFMahadevanS. Probabilistic optimization of sensor placement. In: 25th conference and exposition on structural dynamics, Orlando, Florida, 19–22 February 2007.
185.
BishopGWelchG. An introduction to the Kalman filter. In: Proceedings of SIGGRAPH, Los Angeles, CA, 12–17August2001.
186.
HernandezEM. Efficient sensor placement for state estimation in structural dynamics. Mech Syst Signal Pr2017; 85: 789–800.
187.
Rama Mohan RaoALakshmiKKrishnakumarS. A generalized optimal sensor placement technique for structural health monitoring and system identification. Procedia Engineer2014; 86: 529–538.
188.
BealJMShuklaABrezhnevaOA, et al. Optimal sensor placement for enhancing sensitivity to change in stiffness for structural health monitoring. Optim Eng2008; 9(2): 119–142.
189.
LeeBStaszewskiW. Sensor location studies for damage detection with Lamb waves. Smart Mater Struct2007; 16(2): 399–408.
190.
AyodeleTO. Introduction to machine learning. In: ZhangY. (ed.) New advances in machine learning. London: IntechOpen, 2010, pp. 1–10.
191.
MitchellTBuchananBDeJongG, et al. Machine learning. Annu Rev Comput Sci1990; 4(1): 417–433.
