MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094872754 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2020.3033754

Virtual Sensors for Fault Diagnosis: A Case of Induction Motor Broken Rotor Bar

2020· article· en· W3094872754 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Hosseinpoor, Mohammad Mehdi Arefi, Roozbeh Razavi‐Far, Niloofar Mozafari, Saeede Hazbavi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Data stream miningBar (unit)Computer scienceData streamProcess (computing)Fault detection and isolationRotor (electric)Soft sensorInduction motorFault (geology)Scheme (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringReal-time computingData miningActuator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an industrial implementation of a virtual sensor in the process of fault detection of an induction motor. An ensemble-learning soft-sensor is developed to detect broken rotor bar that is essential to prevent irreparable damage. Most of the existing diagnostic methods assume that the data distribution is static and that all data is available during the training, while in real applications, the data become available as data streams. The proposed method is inspired by the ensemble learning algorithm, which is combined with a new drift detection mechanism. The advantages of the proposed approach are three-fold. First, a fair comparison with other algorithms show the effectiveness of the soft sensor scheme. Second, the presented concept change detection algorithm is capable of detecting a new class in the data stream as well as data distribution change, and last but not least, the efficacy of the proposed algorithm is demonstrated using benchmark concept drift data streams.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207