A Comparative Study of Different Multi-Fidelity Kriging Models for Reliability Analysis

The integration of active learning methods and multi-fidelity (MF) Kriging models has been demonstrated to effectively reduce the number of high-fidelity (HF) samples required for reliability analysis. However, there is a lack of comparative research on different MF Kriging models in this context. In this work, the performances of the hierarchical Kriging model, dis-Kriging model, and Co-Kriging model are compared within one-stage and two-stage active learning frameworks through five numerical examples. The total cost, the number of HF samples required, and the stability of estimated failure probability are utilized to facilitate a comparative analysis of different MF Kriging models. The results from the five examples indicate the following: the hierarchical Kriging model demonstrates a satisfactory performance in both one-stage and two-stage frameworks; the dis-Kriging model is not adequately equipped to handle complex, highly nonlinear problems; and the Co-Kriging model exhibits a lack of robustness, though it performs well in certain cases.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Sciences
Published
2025-11-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312607
Primary Topic
Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Comparative Study of Different Multi-Fidelity Kriging Models for Reliability Analysis

Lingliang Feng, Wan Zheng-quan, Yanqing Li, Xin Hu et al.
Applied Sciences
Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
article

A Comparative Study of Different Multi-Fidelity Kriging Models for Reliability Analysis

Lingliang Feng, Wan Zheng-quan, Yanqing Li, Xin Hu, Shichao Feng, Yitao Wang
article en

Abstract

The integration of active learning methods and multi-fidelity (MF) Kriging models has been demonstrated to effectively reduce the number of high-fidelity (HF) samples required for reliability analysis. However, there is a lack of comparative research on different MF Kriging models in this context. In this work, the performances of the hierarchical Kriging model, dis-Kriging model, and Co-Kriging model are compared within one-stage and two-stage active learning frameworks through five numerical examples. The total cost, the number of HF samples required, and the stability of estimated failure probability are utilized to facilitate a comparative analysis of different MF Kriging models. The results from the five examples indicate the following: the hierarchical Kriging model demonstrates a satisfactory performance in both one-stage and two-stage frameworks; the dis-Kriging model is not adequately equipped to handle complex, highly nonlinear problems; and the Co-Kriging model exhibits a lack of robustness, though it performs well in certain cases.

Applied SciencesVol. 15(23)
Quality and Reliability (Greece) (GR), Wuhan Ship Development & Design Institute (CN), Wuxi Taihu Hospital (CN)
National Key Research and Development Program of China
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Probabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.