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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
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