MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512345112 · doi:10.1109/icphm.2016.7542867

A hydrogenerator model-based failure detection framework to support asset management

2016· article· en· W2512345112 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Olivier Blancke, Antoine Tahan, Dragan Komljenović, N. Amyot, C. Hudon, Mélanie Lévesque

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsAsset managementAsset (computer security)Risk analysis (engineering)EngineeringProcess (computing)HydroelectricityWarning systemHydropowerDecision support systemReliability engineeringComputer scienceBusinessArtificial intelligenceComputer securityFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electrical utilities in North America significantly increased their installed capacities between 1960 and 1990. This ageing fleet is now forcing the producers to begin to use a holistic asset management in a more systematic way by introducing diagnostic and prognostic tools to support them in their decision-making process. For the last few decades, the Hydro-Quebec Research Institute has been working to understand ageing mechanisms and developing a diagnostic and prognostic causal graph model for hydrogenerators based on expert knowledge and diagnostic data. This paper proposes asset and asset system metrics based on graph theory to estimate the probability of detecting a failure using the number of detectable early warning signs. Proposed indicators intend to inform operators and decision makers on the failure detection probability for each individual asset and to identify critical failure detection of assets at an asset system level. An analysis has been carried out on a real hydropower plant for each of its sixteen hydrogenerators. Some results will be presented and critical failure detection rates for hydrogenerators will be identified. A framework will be proposed to improve asset management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207