MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2988491129 · doi:10.4236/jsip.2019.104008

An Adaptive EMD Technique for Induction Motor Fault Detection

2019· article· en· W2988491129 on OpenAlex
Manzar Mahmud, Wilson Wang

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Signal and Information Processing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHilbert–Huang transformSidebandFault (geology)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceSensitivity (control systems)Rotor (electric)Induction motorFault detection and isolationBar (unit)Instantaneous phaseElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringVoltagePhysicsElectrical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable induction motor (IM) fault detection techniques are very useful in industries to diagnose IM defects and improve operational performance. An adaptive empirical mode decomposition (EMD) technology is proposed in this paper for rotor bar fault detection in IMs. As the characteristic fault frequency will change with operating conditions related to load and speed, the proposed adaptive EMD technique correlates fault features over different frequency bands and intrinsic mode function (IMF) sidebands. The adaptive EMD technique uses the first IMF to detect the fault type and the second IMF as an indicator to predict the fault severity. It can overcome the problems of the sensitivity of sideband frequencies related to the speed and load oscillations. The effectiveness of the proposed adaptive EMD technique is verified by experimental tests under different motor conditions.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

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 communication0.0000.006
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.237 · 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