A Symmetrical Component Feature Extraction Method for Fault Detection in Induction Machines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Induction motors (IMs) are among the fully developed electromechanical technologies that are still in use today. Over the course of the last century, their structure, control, and operation have been undergone through several stages of development. Among stages of development, the automated control and continuous monitoring of IMs has benefited from the emergence of modern artificial intelligence (AI) methods. IM automation schemes have demonstrated the ability to provide machine fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) function. AI-based FDD methods in IMs have employed frequency-domain, time-frequency, and time-domain analyses as the basis of their feature extraction schemes. A promising feature extraction scheme is one that uses symmetrical components (SCs) in time-domain FDD systems. Current SC-based approaches, however, are limited in their generalizability to different fault classes, may require detailed machine models, and can suffer from computational limitations. In this paper, an improved feature extraction method that uses SCs for a pattern recognition based FDD scheme for three-phase (3φ) IMs will be presented. This novel feature extraction method will be implemented and verified experimentally to demonstrate high classification performance, increased generalizability, and low computational cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".