MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337538840 · doi:10.1177/1350650115619611

Optimized statistical parameters of acoustic emission signals for monitoring of rolling element bearings

2015· article· en· W2337538840 on OpenAlexaff
Farzad Hemmati, Mohammed Alqaradawi, Mohamed S. Gadala

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part J Journal of Engineering Tribology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersQatar National Research Fund
KeywordsAcoustic emissionRolling-element bearingPrognosticsSIGNAL (programming language)Condition monitoringBearing (navigation)Signal processingEngineeringStructural engineeringAcousticsComputer scienceElectronic engineeringVibrationReliability engineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acoustic emission (AE) signal generated from artificial defects in rolling element bearings are investigated using experimental measurements in this paper. Rolling element bearings are crucial parts of many machines and there has been an increasing demand to find effective and reliable health monitoring technique and advanced signal processing to detect and diagnose the size and location of incipient defects. Condition monitoring of rolling element bearings, comprises four main stages which are, statistical analysis, faults diagnostics, defect size calculation, and prognostics. In this paper, the effect of defect size, operating speed, and loading conditions on statistical parameters of AE signals, using design of experiment method, have been investigated to select the most sensitive parameters for diagnosing incipient faults and defect growth on rolling element bearings.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part J Journal of Engineering TribologySame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207