MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734382158 · doi:10.1109/ijcnn.2017.7966044

Adaptive incremental ensemble of extreme learning machines for fault diagnosis in induction motors

2017· article· en· W2734382158 on OpenAlexaff
Roozbeh Razavi‐Far, Mehrdad Saif, Vasile Palade, Enrico Zio

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtreme learning machineComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceControllabilityMachine learningLinear discriminant analysisEnsemble learningInduction motorFault (geology)Unsupervised learningDiscriminantPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an adaptive incremental ensemble of extreme learning machines for fault diagnosis. The diagnostic system contains a data processing unit which aims to progressively generate discriminant features from the vibration signals for decision making. The decision making unit receives a few sets of labeled discriminant features in a chunk by chunk manner, incrementally learns the features-faults relations, dynamically diagnoses multiple bearing defects, and adaptively adjusts itself to learn new concept classes. This adaptive ensemble system is based on incremental learning of multiple extreme learning machines that are able to consult together and adjust themselves based on their confidence in the decision making. Extreme learning machines are used to construct the hybrid ensemble due to their good controllability and fast learning rate. Experimental results show the efficiency of the hybrid diagnostic system. The proposed diagnostic system is applied to diagnosing bearing defects in an induction motor.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations14
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207