MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939021925 · doi:10.1109/rams.2019.8768978

An Overview of Deep Learning in Prognostics and Health Management

2019· article· en· W2939021925 on OpenAlexaff
Liangwei Zhang, Jing Lin, Bin Liu, Zhicong Zhang, Uday Kumar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersDepartment of Education of Guangdong ProvinceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPrognosticsDeep learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningFault (geology)Feature (linguistics)Raw dataField (mathematics)Supervised learningFeature learningFeature extractionFault detection and isolationData miningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has attracted intense interest recently in Prognostics and Health Management (PHM), due to its enormous representing power and capability in automated feature learning. This paper attempts to survey recent advancements of PHM methodologies associated with deep learning. After a brief introduction to several deep learning models, we reviewed and analyzed applications of fault detection, diagnosis and prognosis using deep learning, respectively. The survey reveals that most existing work utilized deep learning to conduct feature learning from unstructured raw data including vibration data, current signals, images and videos. Deep learning provides a general framework for PHM applications: fault detection uses either reconstruction error or stacks a binary classier on top of the network to detect anomalies; fault diagnosis typically adds a soft-max layer to perform multi-class classification; and prognosis adds a continuous regression layer to predict remaining useful life. We further pointed out some challenges and potential opportunities in the field.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207