Failure Detection Using a Fuzzy Neural Network with an Automatic Input Selection Algorithm
It is well known that the performance of fuzzy neural networks applied to sensor monitoring strongly depends on the selection of inputs. In their applications to sensor monitoring, there are usually a large number of input variables related to a relevant output. As the number of input variables increases, the required training time of a fuzzy neural network increases exponentially. Thus, it is essential to reduce the number of inputs to a fuzzy neural network and moreover, to select the optimum number of mutually independent inputs that are able to clearly define the input-output mapping. In this chapter, an automatic input selection routine was described which combines the principal component analysis, correlation analysis, and genetic algorithm to select important input features. Also, whether the sensors fail or not is determined by applying the sequential probability ratio test to the residuals between the estimated signals and the measured signals. The described sensor failure detection method was verified through applications to the steam generator water level, the steam generator steam flowrate, the pressurizer water level, and the pressurizer pressure sensors in pressurized water reactors.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- B. R. Upadhyaya, et al., Development and Testing of an Integrated Signal Validation System for Nuclear Power Plants, DOE/NE/37959–35, Sept. 1989.Google Scholar
- A. Erbay and B. R. Upadhyaya, “A personal computer-based on-line signal validation system for nuclear power plants,” Nucl. Technology, vol. 119, no. 1, pp. 63–75, July 1997.Google Scholar
- R. M. Singer, K. C. Gross, J. P. Herzog, R. W. King, and S. W. Wegerich, “Model-based nuclear plant monitoring and fault detection: theoretical foundations,” Proc. 9th Intl. Conf. on Intelligence Systems Applications to Power Systems, Seoul, Korea, 1997.Google Scholar
- J. W. Hines, D. J. Wrest, and R. E. Uhrig, “Signal validation using an adaptive neural fuzzy inference system,” Nucl. Technology, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 181–193, 1997.Google Scholar
- J. W. Heins, Andrei V. Gribok, Ibrahim Attieh, and Robert E. Uhrig, “Regularization method for inferential sensing in nuclear power plants,” in Da Ruan (ed) Fuzzy Systems and Soft Computing in Nuclear Engineering, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 285–314, 1999.Google Scholar
- P. Fantoni, S. Figedy, and A. Racz, “A neuro-fuzzy model applied full range signal validation of PWR nuclear power plant data,” FLINS-98, Antwerpen, Belgium, 1998.Google Scholar
- Tomas Eklov, Per Martensson, and Ingemar Lundstorm, “Selection of variables for interpreting multivariate gas sensor data,” Analytica Chimica Acta, vol. 381, pp. 221232, 1999.Google Scholar
- D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning, Addison Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1989.Google Scholar
- M. Mitchell, An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1996.Google Scholar
- T. Takagi and M. Sugeno, “Fuzzy identification of systems and its applications to modeling and control,” IEEE Trans. System, Man, Cybern, vol. 1, pp. 116–132, 1985.Google Scholar
- M. G. Na, Neuro-fuzzy control applications in pressurized water reactors: in Da Ruan (ed) Fuzzy Systems and Soft Computing in Nuclear Engineering, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp. 172–207, 1999.Google Scholar
- W. J. Lee, B.-D. Chung, J.-J. Jeong, K.-S. Ha, and M.-K. Hwang, Improved Features of MARS 1.4 and Verification, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, KAERUTR1386–99, 1999.Google Scholar