Evaluating the Reliability Function and the Mean Residual Life for Equipment With Unobservable States
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes a model to calculate the reliability function, and the mean residual (remaining) life of a piece of equipment, when its degradation state is not directly observable. At each observation moment, an indicator of the underlying unobservable degradation state is observed, and the monitoring information is collected. The observation process is due to a condition monitoring system where the obtained information is not perfect. For that reason, the observation process doesn't directly reveal the exact degradation state. To match an indicator's value to the unobservable degradation state, a stochastic relation between them is given by an observation probability matrix. It is assumed that the equipment's unobservable degradation state transition follows a Markov chain, and we model it using a hidden Markov model. The Bayes' rule is used to determine the probability of being in a certain degradation state at each observation moment. Cox's time-dependent proportional hazards model is considered to model the equipment's failure rate. This paper addresses two main problems: the problem of imperfect observations, and the problem of taking into account the whole history of observations. Two numerical examples are presented.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it