MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974580891 · doi:10.1109/ccdc.2011.5968517

Frequency demodulation for detecting mechanical faults with impulsive vibration signatures

2011· article· en· W1974580891 on OpenAlexaff
Ming Liang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemodulationVibrationFault (geology)AmplitudeFrequency modulationComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)AcousticsBearing (navigation)Time–frequency analysisControl theory (sociology)Electronic engineeringEngineeringPhysicsRadio frequencyTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a frequency demodulation approach to detect machinery fault with impulsive signatures. Following frequency demodulation, amplitude demodulation and spectral analysis can effectively reveal the existence of fault. The measured vibration signal is initially transformed using the Teager Energy Operator which simultaneously implements amplitude and frequency demodulations. The effectiveness of the proposed method has been demonstrated using the experimental data acquired from a mechanical system working on an AC motor with a faulty inner race bearing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207