MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110721942 · doi:10.3138/infor.45.2.83

Model for the Selection of Predictive Maintenance Techniques

2007· article· en· W2110721942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
María Carmen Carnero

Bibliographic record

VenueINFOR Information Systems and Operational Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredictive maintenanceComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Model predictive controlSelection (genetic algorithm)Process (computing)Quality (philosophy)Risk analysis (engineering)Reliability engineeringControl (management)EngineeringMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Predictive Maintenance Program can provide significant benefits to industrial plants in the areas of security, quality and availability. However, Predictive Maintenance Programs have lacked analysis in matters related to their set up, management and control. In this paper, a model is proposed in order to select the most suitable predictive technique to set up in an industrial plant. For this purpose, different alternatives are proposed depending on the technological level of the Predictive Maintenance Program. The condition monitoring techniques considered in the model are: vibration analysis and lubricant analysis; the integration of both techniques is also considered in the construction of alternatives. The proposed model can facilitate the decision making process for setting up Predictive Maintenance programs, and also help to avoid the failure of such programs. The model has been tested in a set of industrial plants with a Predictive Maintenance Program.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFOR Information Systems and Operational ResearchSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207