Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32013073›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Damage Identification in Structural Health Monitoring: A Brief Review from its Implementation to the Use of Data-Driven Applications.

Diego A Tibaduiza Burgos, Ricardo C Gomez Vargas, Cesar Pedraza, David Agis, Francesc Pozo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Diego A Tibaduiza BurgosDepartamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica y Electrónica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Cra 45 No. 26-85, 111321 Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-4498-596X
Ricardo C Gomez VargasDepartamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica y Electrónica, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Cra 45 No. 26-85, 111321 Bogotá, Colombia.
Cesar PedrazaDepartamento de Ingeniería de Sistemas e Industrial, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Cra 45 No. 26-85, 111321 Bogotá, Colombia.
David AgisControl, Modeling, Identification and Applications (CoDAlab), Departament de Matemàtiques, Escola d'Enginyeria de Barcelona Est (EEBE), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Campus Diagonal-Besòs (CDB), Eduard Maristany, 16, 08019 Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7283-6902
Francesc PozoControl, Modeling, Identification and Applications (CoDAlab), Departament de Matemàtiques, Escola d'Enginyeria de Barcelona Est (EEBE), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), Campus Diagonal-Besòs (CDB), Eduard Maristany, 16, 08019 Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8958-6789

Funding

Generalitat de Catalunya 2017 SGR 388Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Competitividad, Gobierno de España DPI2017-82930-C2-1-R
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The damage identification process provides relevant information about the current state of a structure under inspection, and it can be approached from two different points of view. The first approach uses data-driven algorithms, which are usually associated with the collection of data using sensors. Data are subsequently processed and analyzed. The second approach uses models to analyze information about the structure. In the latter case, the overall performance of the approach is associated with the accuracy of the model and the information that is used to define it. Although both approaches are widely used, data-driven algorithms are preferred in most cases because they afford the ability to analyze data acquired from sensors and to provide a real-time solution for decision making; however, these approaches involve high-performance processors due to the high computational cost. As a contribution to the researchers working with data-driven algorithms and applications, this work presents a brief review of data-driven algorithms for damage identification in structural health-monitoring applications. This review covers damage detection, localization, classification, extension, and prognosis, as well as the development of smart structures. The literature is systematically reviewed according to the natural steps of a structural health-monitoring system. This review also includes information on the types of sensors used as well as on the development of data-driven algorithms for damage identification.

Indexed as

damage identificationdata-driven algorithmssensorsstructural health monitoring

Identifiers

PMID32013073
PMCPMC7038520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.