MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553003159 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2015-0046

A NEW GEARBOX FAULT DIAGNOSIS METHOD BASED ON LUCY–RICHARDSON DECONVOLUTION

2015· article· en· W2553003159 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xinghui Zhang, Jianshe Kang, Hongzhi Teng, Jianmin Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault (geology)DeconvolutionEnvelope (radar)Context (archaeology)Bearing (navigation)Noise (video)Rolling-element bearingComputer scienceBlind deconvolutionEngineeringStructural engineeringAlgorithmAcousticsArtificial intelligenceVibrationGeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gear and bearing faults are the main causes of gearbox failure. Till now, incipient fault diagnosis of these two components has been a problem and needs further research. In this context, it is found that Lucy–Richardson deconvolution (LRD) proved to be an excellent tool to enhance fault diagnosis in rolling element bearings and gears. LRD’s good identification capabilities of fault frequencies are presented which outperform envelope analysis. This is very critical for early fault diagnosis. The case studies were carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed method. The results of simulated and experimental studies show that LRD is efficient in alleviating the negative effect of noise and transmission path. The results of simulation and experimental tests demonstrated outperformance of LRD compared to classical envelope analysis for fault diagnosis in rolling element bearings and gears, especially when it is applied to the processing of signals with strong background noise.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207