Health Monitoring and Degradation Prognostics in Gas Turbine Engines Using Dynamic Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper two artificially intelligent methodologies are proposed and developed for degradation prognosis and health monitoring of gas turbine engines. Our objective is to predict the degradation trends by studying their effects on the engine measurable parameters, such as the temperature, at critical points of the gas turbine engine. The first prognostic scheme is based on a recurrent neural network (RNN) architecture. This architecture enables ONE to learn the engine degradations from the available measurable data. The second prognostic scheme is based on a nonlinear auto-regressive with exogenous input (NARX) neural network architecture. It is shown that this network can be trained with fewer data points and the prediction errors are lower as compared to the RNN architecture. To manage prognostic and prediction uncertainties upper and lower threshold bounds are defined and obtained. Various scenarios and case studies are presented to illustrate and demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed neural network-based prognostic approaches. To evaluate and compare the prediction results between our two proposed neural network schemes, a metric known as the normalized Akaike information criterion (NAIC) is utilized. A smaller NAIC shows a better, a more accurate and a more effective prediction outcome. The NAIC values are obtained for each case and the networks are compared relatively with one another.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".