A comparison of deterministic, reliability-based and risk-based structural optimization under uncertainty

In this paper, the effects of uncertainty and expected costs of failure on optimum structural design are investigated, by comparing three distinct formulations of structural optimization problems. Deterministic Design Optimization (DDO) allows one the find the shape or configuration of a structure that is optimum in terms of mechanics, but the formulation grossly neglects parameter uncertainty and its effects on structural safety. Reliability-based Design Optimization (RBDO) has emerged as an alternative to properly model the safety-under-uncertainty part of the problem. With RBDO, one can ensure that a minimum (and measurable) level of safety is achieved by the optimum structure. However, results are dependent on the failure probabilities used as constraints in the analysis. Risk optimization (RO) increases the scope of the problem by addressing the compromising goals of economy and safety. This is accomplished by quantifying the monetary consequences of failure, as well as the costs associated with construction, operation and maintenance. RO yields the optimum topology and the optimum point of balance between economy and safety. Results are compared for some example problems. The broader RO solution is found first, and optimum results are used as constraints in DDO and RBDO. Results show that even when optimum safety coefficients are used as constraints in DDO, the formulation leads to configurations which respect these design constraints, reduce manufacturing costs but increase total expected costs (including expected costs of failure). When (optimum) system failure probability is used as a constraint in RBDO, this solution also reduces manufacturing costs but by increasing total expected costs. This happens when the costs associated with different failure modes are distinct. Hence, a general equivalence between the formulations cannot be established. Optimum structural design considering expected costs of failure cannot be controlled solely by safety factors nor by failure probability constraints, but will depend on actual structural configuration. (c) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Quantum entanglement of bound particles under free center of mass dispersion

On the basis of the full analytical solution of the overall unitary dynamics, the time evolution of entanglement is studied in a simple bipartite model system evolving unitarily from a pure initial state. The system consists of two particles in one spatial dimension bound by harmonic forces and having its free center of mass initially localized in space in a minimum uncertainty wavepacket. The existence of such initial states in which the bound particles are not entangled is discussed. Galilean invariance of the system ensures that the dynamics of entanglement between the two particles is independent of the wavepacket mean momentum. In fact, as shown, it is driven by the dispersive center of mass free dynamics, and evolves in a time scale that depends on the interparticle interaction in an essential way.

Brain activity and medical diagnosis: an EEG study

Abstract Background Despite new brain imaging techniques that have improved the study of the underlying processes of human decision-making, to the best of our knowledge, there have been very few studies that have attempted to investigate brain activity during medical diagnostic processing. We investigated brain electroencephalography (EEG) activity associated with diagnostic decision-making in the realm of veterinary medicine using X-rays as a fundamental auxiliary test. EEG signals were analysed using Principal Components (PCA) and Logistic Regression Analysis Results The principal component analysis revealed three patterns that accounted for 85% of the total variance in the EEG activity recorded while veterinary doctors read a clinical history, examined an X-ray image pertinent to a medical case, and selected among alternative diagnostic hypotheses. Two of these patterns are proposed to be associated with visual processing and the executive control of the task. The other two patterns are proposed to be related to the reasoning process that occurs during diagnostic decision-making. Conclusions PCA analysis was successful in disclosing the different patterns of brain activity associated with hypothesis triggering and handling (pattern P1); identification uncertainty and prevalence assessment (pattern P3), and hypothesis plausibility calculation (pattern P2); Logistic regression analysis was successful in disclosing the brain activity associated with clinical reasoning success, and together with regression analysis showed that clinical practice reorganizes the neural circuits supporting clinical reasoning.