Neural and Fuzzy Transient Classification Systems: General Techniques and Applications in Nuclear Power Plants

  • Davide Roverso
Part of the Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing book series (STUDFUZZ, volume 38)


In this chapter the problem of identing events in dynamic processes (e.g., faults, anomalous behaviours, etc.) is tackled with soft computing techniques aimed at the classification of the process transients generated by such events. A review of previous work is followed by a discussion of several alternative designs and models which employ both fuzzy and neural systems. These have been developed during an ongoing reserch program which was initiated by the need of finding new principled methods to perform alarm structuring/suppression in a nuclear power plant alarm system. This initial goal was soon expanded beyond alarm handling, to include diagnostic tasks in general. The application of these systems to domains other than NPPs was also taken into special consideration. A systematic study was carried out with the aim of comparing alternative neural network designs and models. Four main approaches have been investigated: radial basis function (RBF) neural networks and cascade-RBF neural networks combined with fuzzy clustering, self-organizing map neural networks, and recurrent neural networks. The main evaluation criteria adopted were: identification accuracy, reliability (i.e., correct recognition of an unknown event as such), robustness (to noise and to changing initial conditions), and real time performance. A series of initial tests on a small set of BWR transients was recently followed by more advanced tests on PWR transients corresponding to various occurrences of rapid load rejection events (plant islanding). The chapter is closed by a discussion of open issues and future directions for research and applications.


Nuclear Power Plant Fuzzy Cluster Radial Basis Function Model Elman Network Neural Classifier 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    N.T. Ferdestrommen, B.R. Mourn, B. Torralba, C. Decurnex, “CASH: An Advanced Computerized Alarm System”, in Proceedings of the ANS-meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, June 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T.S. Brendeford “General Knowledge Structure for Diagnosis”, in Proceedings of the IAEA’s specialist’s Meeting on Monitoring and Diagnosis Systems to Improve Nuclear Power Plant Reliability and Safety, Barnwood, UK, 14–17 May 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Fantoni, A. Serenssen, and G. Mayer “CAMS: A Computerised Accident Management System for Operator Support During Normal and Abnormal Conditions in Nuclear Power Plants”, in Proceedings of the Second OECD Specialist Meeting on Operator Aids for Severe Accident Management (SAMOA-2), September 1997.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P.F. Fantoni and A. Mazzola, “Multiple-Failure Signal Validation in Nuclear Power Plants using Artificial Neural Networks”, Nuclear Technology, March 1996.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P.F. Fantoni, “Neuro-Fuzzy Models Applied to Full Range Signal Validation in Nuclear Power Plants”, ANS International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation, control and Human Machine Interface, The Pennsylvania State University, 1996.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P.F. Fantoni, S. Figedy, A. Racz, B. Papin, “A Neuro-Fuzzy Model Applied to Full Range Signal Validation of PWR Nuclear Power Plant Data”, inProceedings of FLINS’98, the 3rd International FLINS Workshop on Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Technologies for Nuclear Science and Industry, Antwerp, Belgium, September 1998.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E.B. Bartlett and R.E. Uhrig, “Nuclear Power Plant Status Diagnostics Using an Artificial Neural Network”, Nuclear Technology, Vol. 97, 1992, pp. 272–281.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Basu and E.B. Bartlett, “Detecting Faults in a Nuclear Power Plant by Using a Dynamic Node Architecture Artificial Neural Network”, Nuclear Science and Engineering, Vol. 116, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Y. Bartal, J. Lin, and R.E. Uhrig, “Nuclear Power Plant Transient Diagnostics Using Artificial Neural Networks that Allow ”Don’t-Know“ Classifications”, Nuclear Technology, Vol. 110, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. Furukawa, T. Ueda, and M. Kitamura, “Use of Self-Organizing Neural Networks for Rational Definition of Plant Diagnostic Symptoms”, Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Computer-Based Human Support Systems: Technology, Methods, and Future, The American Nuclear Society Inc., La Grange Park, IL, 1995, pp. 441–448.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Jeong, K. Furuta, S. Kondo, “Identification of Transient in Nuclear Power Plant Using Neural Network with Implicit Time Measure”, Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Computer-Based Human Support Systems: Technology, Methods, and Future, The American Nuclear Society Inc., La Grange Park, IL, 1995, pp. 467–474.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Jeong, K. Furuta, S. Kondo, “Identification of Transient in Nuclear Power Plant Using Adaptive Template Matching with Neural Network”, Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Control, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies, NPICandHMIT’96, The American Nuclear Society Inc., La Grange Park, IL, 1996, pp. 243–250.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Y. Ohga, S. Arita, T. Fukuzaki, N. Takinawa, Y. Takano, S. Shiratory, and T. Wada, “Evaluation Test of Event Identification Method Using Neural Network at Kashiwazaki Kariwa Nuclear Power Station Unit No.4”, Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology,Vol. 33, No. 5, 1996, pp. 439447.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    K.C. Kwon, C.S. Ham, and J.H. Kim, “An Application of Hidden Markov Model to Transient Identification in Nuclear Power Plants”, Proceedings of the International Topical Meeting on Computer-Based Human Support Systems.’ Technology, Methods, and Future, The American Nuclear Society Inc., La Grange Park, IL, 1995, pp. 275–280.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    K.C. Kwon and C.S. Ham, “A Stochastic Approach with the Hidden Markov Model for Accident Diagnosis in Nuclear Power Plants”, HRP Workshop on Intelligent Decision Support Systems for Emergency Management, Halden, Norway, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    M.H. Hassoun, Fundamentals of Artificial Neural Networks, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995.MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    J.T. Tou and R.C. Gonzalez, Pattern Recognition Principles, p. 97. Addison-Wesley, Reading (MA ), 1974.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J.C. Bezdek, Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms, Plenum Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    R. Krishnapuram and J. Keller, “A possibilistic approach to clustering”, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1993.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D.S. Broomhead and D. Lowe, “Multivariable functional interpolation and adaptive networks”, Complex Systems, Vol. 2, pp. 321–355, 1988.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    S. Chen, C.F.N. Cowan, and P.M. Grant, “Orthogonal Least Squares Learning Algorithm for Radial Basis Function Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 302309, 1991.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    T. Kohonen, Self-Organization and Associative Memory, 3rd edn., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    G.J. Chappel and J.G. Taylor, “The Temporal Kohonen Map”,Neural Networks, Vol. 6, pp. 441445, 1993.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. Koskela, M. Varsta, J. Heikkonen, and K. Kaski, “Time Series Prediction using Recurrent SOM with Local Linear Models”, International Journal of Knowledge Based Intelligent Engineering Systems, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    J.L. Elman, “Finding structure in time”, Cognitive Science, Vol. 14, pp. 179–211, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Y. Bengio, P. Simard, and P. Frasconi, “Learning Long-Term Dependencies with Gradient Descent is Difficult”, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol. 5 (2), pp. 157–166, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Y. Freund, “Boosting a weak learning algorithm by majority”,Information and Computation, Vol. 121 (2), pp. 256–285, 1995.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Y. Freund and R.E. Shapire, “Experiments with a New Boosting Algorithm”, in Machine Learning, Proceeding of the 13 th International Conference (ICML 196), pp. 148–156, Morgan Kaufmann, Bari (Italy), 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Davide Roverso
    • 1
  1. 1.Institutt for energiteknikkOECD Halden Reactor ProjectHaldenNorway

Personalised recommendations