BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Emily Clark

Emily Clark contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
eess.SPMachine Learningmath.OC

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

PySensors: A Python Package for Sparse Sensor Placement

PySensors is a Python package for selecting and placing a sparse set of sensors for classification and reconstruction tasks. Specifically, PySensors implements algorithms for data-driven sparse sensor placement optimization for reconstruction (SSPOR) and sparse sensor placement optimization for classification (SSPOC). In this work we provide a brief description of the mathematical algorithms and theory for sparse sensor optimization, along with an overview and demonstration of the features implemented in PySensors (with code examples). We also include practical advice for user and a list of potential extensions to PySensors. Software is available at https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysensors.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Bracketing brackets with bras and kets

Brackets are an essential component in aircraft manufacture and design, joining parts together, supporting weight, holding wires, and strengthening joints. Hundreds or thousands of unique brackets are used in every aircraft, but manufacturing a large number of distinct brackets is inefficient and expensive. Fortunately, many so-called "different" brackets are in fact very similar or even identical to each other. In this manuscript, we present a data-driven framework for constructing a comparatively small group of representative brackets from a large catalog of current brackets, based on hierarchical clustering of bracket data. We find that for a modern commercial aircraft, the full set of brackets can be reduced by 30\% while still describing half of the test set sufficiently accurately. This approach is based on designing an inner product that quantifies a multi-objective similarity between two brackets, which are the "bra" and the "ket" of the inner product. Although we demonstrate this algorithm to reduce the number of brackets in aerospace manufacturing, it may be generally applied to any large-scale component standardization effort.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Multi-fidelity sensor selection: Greedy algorithms to place cheap and expensive sensors with cost constraints

We develop greedy algorithms to approximate the optimal solution to the multi-fidelity sensor selection problem, which is a cost constrained optimization problem prescribing the placement and number of cheap (low signal-to-noise) and expensive (high signal-to-noise) sensors in an environment or state space. Specifically, we evaluate the composition of cheap and expensive sensors, along with their placement, required to achieve accurate reconstruction of a high-dimensional state. We use the column-pivoted QR decomposition to obtain preliminary sensor positions. How many of each type of sensor to use is highly dependent upon the sensor noise levels, sensor costs, overall cost budget, and the singular value spectrum of the data measured. Such nuances allow us to provide sensor selection recommendations based on computational results for asymptotic regions of parameter space. We also present a systematic exploration of the effects of the number of modes and sensors on reconstruction error when using one type of sensor. Our extensive exploration of multi-fidelity sensor composition as a function of data characteristics is the first of its kind to provide guidelines towards optimal multi-fidelity sensor selection.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Sensor Selection With Cost Constraints for Dynamically Relevant Bases

We consider cost-constrained sparse sensor selection for full-state reconstruction, applying a well-known greedy algorithm to dynamical systems for which the usual singular value decomposition (SVD) basis may not be available or preferred. We apply the cost-modified, column-pivoted QR decomposition to a physically relevant basis -- the pivots correspond to sensor locations, and these locations are penalized with a heterogeneous cost function. In considering different bases, we are able to account for the dynamics of the particular system, yielding sensor arrays that are nearly Pareto optimal in sensor cost and performance in the chosen basis. This flexibility extends our framework to include actuation and dynamic estimation, and to select sensors without training data. We provide three examples from the physical and engineering sciences and evaluate sensor selection in three dynamically relevant bases: truncated balanced modes for control systems, dynamic mode decomposition (DMD) modes, and a basis of analytic modes. We find that these bases all yield effective sensor arrays and reconstructions for their respective systems. When possible, we compare to results using an SVD basis and evaluate tradeoffs between methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access