MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775394460 · doi:10.1109/smc.2017.8123006

Dimensionality reduction-based diagnosis of bearing defects in induction motors

2017· article· en· W2775394460 on OpenAlexafffund
Maryam Farajzadeh-Zanjani, Roozbeh Razavi‐Far, Mehrdad Saif

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDimensionality reductionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceFeature extractionComputer scienceCurse of dimensionalityFeature vectorInduction motorMetric (unit)Fault (geology)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient diagnosis of bearing defects in induction motors usually requires extracting informative features from the vibration signal and efficiently reducing the dimensionality of the features. In this paper, the vibration signal is primarily analyzed by the empirical mode decomposition technique to extract informative intrinsic mode functions as a set of features. The dimensionality of the extracted feature set is reduced by means of maximally collapsing metric learning (MCML) to create an informative set of small-sized features for fault classification. MCML is an efficient supervised dimensionality reduction technique which aims to collapse patterns of the similar class to a point in the feature space while separates patterns of other classes to the maximum extent possible. To compare the performance of MCML, other state-of-the-art unsupervised and supervised techniques are used for the dimension reduction of the features. The fault diagnosis unit includes various classifiers which aim to diagnose multiple bearing defects that are ball, inner race and outer race defects of different diameters.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207