MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094346949 · doi:10.3390/s140406207

Enhancement of the Wear Particle Monitoring Capability of Oil Debris Sensors Using a Maximal Overlap Discrete Wavelet Transform with Optimal Decomposition Depth

2014· article· en· W2094346949 on OpenAlexafffund
Chuan Li, Jianlong Peng, Ming Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLubricants and Their Additives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChongqing Science and Technology CommissionNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDiscrete wavelet transformParticle (ecology)DebrisComputer scienceWaveletAcousticsMaterials scienceWavelet transformRemote sensingBiological systemArtificial intelligenceGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oil debris sensors are effective tools to monitor wear particles in lubricants. For in situ applications, surrounding noise and vibration interferences often distort the oil debris signature of the sensor. Hence extracting oil debris signatures from sensor signals is a challenging task for wear particle monitoring. In this paper we employ the maximal overlap discrete wavelet transform (MODWT) with optimal decomposition depth to enhance the wear particle monitoring capability. The sensor signal is decomposed by the MODWT into different depths for detecting the wear particle existence. To extract the authentic particle signature with minimal distortion, the root mean square deviation of kurtosis value of the segmented signal residue is adopted as a criterion to obtain the optimal decomposition depth for the MODWT. The proposed approach is evaluated using both simulated and experimental wear particles. The results show that the present method can improve the oil debris monitoring capability without structural upgrade requirements.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations40
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicLubricants and Their AdditivesFrench-language works237,207