MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2043514335 · doi:10.1109/icif.2006.301598

Fault Diagnosis Using Multi-Source Information Fusion

2006· article· en· W2043514335 on OpenAlexafffund
Xianfeng Fan, Ming J. Zuo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsFault (geology)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Information fusionData miningRepresentation (politics)Fuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceKnowledge representation and reasoningSensor fusionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault diagnosis plays an important role in ensuring system reliability. Accurate fault diagnosis relies on data, fault features, diagnostic knowledge, reasoning, and decision-making. The following issues such as certainty and sufficiency of collected data, importance of features in diagnosis, and accuracy of diagnostic knowledge affect the accuracy of fault diagnosis greatly. Dempster-Shafer (D-S) evidence theory based multi-information fusion can provide a mechanism for representation of uncertain and imprecise information. However, it cannot directly handle the issues of evidence sufficiency, evidence importance, or conflicting evidences. An improved D-S evidence theory through the introduction of a fuzzy membership function, importance indexes, and conflict factors is reported in this paper. Experiment analysis results indicate that the proposed method is effective for practical fault diagnosis

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→