MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779786642 · doi:10.21595/jve.2017.18365

Fault diagnosis of rotor using EMD thresholding-based de-noising combined with probabilistic neural network

2017· article· en· W2779786642 on OpenAlexaff
Dong Liu, Hongtao Zeng, Zhihuai Xiao, Lihong Peng, O.P. Malik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vibroengineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMinistry of Water ResourcesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsThresholdingPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceHilbert–Huang transformArtificial neural networkProbabilistic neural networkWaveletFeature extractionNoise reductionFault (geology)SIGNAL (programming language)Rotor (electric)Feature (linguistics)Discrete wavelet transformWavelet transformEngineeringComputer visionTime delay neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De-noising of signal processing is crucial for fault diagnosis in order to successfully conduct feature extraction and is an efficient method for accurate determination of cause. In this paper, the empirical mode decomposition (EMD) thresholding-based de-noising method and probabilistic neural network (PNN) are respectively used in the de-noising of the vibration signal and rotor fault diagnosis and compared with wavelet thresholding-based de-noising technology and back propagation neural network (BPNN). The results show that the clear iterative EMD interval thresholding performs better than wavelet thresholding in the de-noising of the vibration signal, and avoids the determination of wavelet basis and decomposition level. In addition, the PNN created by feature samples does not require training and has a higher accuracy than BPNN.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VibroengineeringSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207