Reliability Modeling and Analysis of Load-Sharing Systems With Continuously Degrading Components
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a reliability modeling and analysis framework for load-sharing systems with identical components subject to continuous degradation. It is assumed that the components in the system suffer from degradation through an additive impact under increased workload caused by consecutive failures. A log-linear link function is used to describe the relationship between the degradation rate and load stress levels. By assuming that the component degradation is well modeled by a step-wise drifted Wiener process, we construct maximum likelihood estimates (MLEs) for unknown parameters and related reliability characteristics by combining analytical and numerical methods. Approximate initial guesses are proposed to lessen the computational burden in numerical estimation. The estimated distribution of MLE is given in the form of multivariate normal distribution with the aid of Fisher information. Alternative confidence intervals are provided by bootstrapping methods. A simulation study with various sample sizes and inspection intervals is presented to analyze the estimation accuracy. Finally, the proposed approach is illustrated by track degradation data from an application example.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it