Probability-Based Prediction of Degrading Dynamic Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a methodology to provide the cumulative failure distribution (CDF) for degrading, uncertain, and dynamic systems. The uniqueness and novelty of the methodology is that long service time over which degradation occurs has been augmented with much shorter cycle time over which there is uncertainty in the system dynamics due to uncertain design variables. The significance of the proposed methodology is that it sets the foundation for setting realistic life-cycle management policies for dynamic systems. The methodology first replaces the implicit mechanistic model with a simple explicit meta-model with the help of design of experiments and singular value decomposition, then transforms the dynamic, time variant, probabilistic problem into a sequence of time invariant steady-state probability problems using cycle-time performance measures and discrete service time, and finally, builds the CDF as the summation of the incremental service-time failure probabilities over the planned life time. For multiple failure modes and multiple discrete service times, set theory establishes a sequence of true incremental failure regions. A practical implementation of the theory requires only two contiguous service-times. Probabilities may be evaluated by any convenient method, such as Monte Carlo and the first-order reliability method. Error analysis provides ways to control errors with regards to probability calculations and meta-model fitting. A case study of a common servo-control mechanism shows that the new methodology is sufficiently fast for design purposes and sufficiently accurate for engineering applications.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".