MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917397300 · doi:10.1142/s0218001419400196

Failure Modeling of a Propulsion Subsystem: Unsupervised and Semi-Supervised Approaches to Anomaly Detection

2019· article· en· W2917397300 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Cheung, Julio J. Valdés, Richard Salas Chavez, Srishti Sehgal

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionTurbochargerSupport vector machineComputer scienceCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRandom forestProcess (computing)Supervised learningData miningArtificial neural networkEngineeringTurbine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the sensor data related to a diesel engine system and specifically its turbocharger subsystem were analyzed. An incident where the turbocharger seized was recorded by dozens of standard turbocharger-related sensors. By training models to distinguish between normal healthy operating conditions and deteriorated conditions, there is an opportunity to develop prognostic and predictive tools to ideally help prevent a similar occurrence in the future. Analysis of this event provides an opportunity to identify changes in equipment indicators with a known outcome. A number of data analysis tools were used to characterize the healthy and deteriorated states of the turbocharger system, including various supervised classification as well as semi-supervised and unsupervised anomaly detection techniques. The leader clustering algorithm was also implemented to reduce the amount of data to train and develop the models. This paper describes the results of this modeling process, validated by testing on healthy data from the same propulsion system and a second distinct one. Although this problem posed challenges due to the severely imbalanced class distribution, the supervised classifiers, in particular Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Random Forest (RF), performed very well in all metrics while the unsupervised anomaly detection models achieved near-perfect accuracy for identifying healthy turbocharger states.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207