MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991533862 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2019.2954054

Prognosis of Bearing Degeneration Using Adaptive Quaternion Least Mean Biquadrate Under Framework of Hypercomplex Data

2019· article· en· W2991533862 on OpenAlexafffund
Qing Li, Ming J. Zuo, Steven Y. Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQuaternionHypercomplex numberPrognosticsNonlinear systemAlgorithmRegularization (linguistics)MathematicsComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prognostics of bearing degeneration play a crucial role in implementation of systems maintenance strategies. Although numerous classical prognostic models have been developed, these models are carried out based on channel-wise processing and therefore fail to capture the inherent nonlinear and coupling nature of multi-dimensional or multi-channel data. To address this issue, a novel prognostics method based on adaptive quaternion-valued least-mean biquadrate (AQ-LMB) algorithm is proposed for a unified processing of hypercomplex data by the virtue of quaternion algebra. The cost function of the proposed AQ-LMB algorithm is designed via the biquadrate form of system output error to adapt to the more common nonlinear and non-Gaussian data, and the update weight vector is derived through Hamilton calculus instead of traditional complex gradient calculation. First, the time series of health indicators (e.g., root-mean-square, RMS) derived from historical data are decomposed by a nonconvex sparse regularization (SR) algorithm associated with a nonconvex penalty, that is, the low frequency trend component (LFC) and high frequency noise component (HFC) are obtained. Then both LFC and HFC are respectively predicted by the AQ-LMB algorithm. The final predicted health indicators can be obtained by integrating the correspondingly predicted LFC and HFC. The separate analysis of both sub-components makes it possible to distinguish their respective contributions to the entire degeneration process, thus avoiding false deviation and improving the prediction accuracy. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed nonconvex SR and AQ-LMB approach in improving prognostic accuracy is illustrated via three-and four-dimensional run-to-failure datasets of the rolling bearings.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207