MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801346558 · doi:10.1063/1.5031520

The role of data fusion in predictive maintenance using digital twin

2018· article· en· W2801346558 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

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSensor fusionPredictive maintenanceAerospaceData modelingAsset (computer security)Big dataDistributed computingData miningReliability engineeringDatabaseArtificial intelligenceEngineeringComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern aerospace industry is migrating from reactive to proactive and predictive maintenance to increase platform operational availability and efficiency, extend its useful life cycle and reduce its life cycle cost. Multiphysics modeling together with data-driven analytics generate a new paradigm called “Digital Twin.” The digital twin is actually a living model of the physical asset or system, which continually adapts to operational changes based on the collected online data and information, and can forecast the future of the corresponding physical counterpart. This paper reviews the overall framework to develop a digital twin coupled with the industrial Internet of Things technology to advance aerospace platforms autonomy. Data fusion techniques particularly play a significant role in the digital twin framework. The flow of information from raw data to high-level decision making is propelled by sensor-to-sensor, sensor-to-model, and model-to-model fusion. This paper further discusses and identifies the role of data fusion in the digital twin framework for aircraft predictive maintenance.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.215 · 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