MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic detection of rare observations during production tests using statistical models

2020· article· en· W3103821869 on OpenAlexaff
Alex Mourer, Jérôme Lacaille, Mădălina Olteanu, Marie Chavent

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Conference of the PHM Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
FundersCHIST-ERASafran Aircraft EnginesSafranAssociation Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie
KeywordsInterpretabilityComputer scienceCluster analysisContext (archaeology)Machine learningAnomaly detectionRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligenceData miningFeature (linguistics)Variable (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Engines are verified through production tests before delivering them to customers. During those tests, lot of measures are taken on different parts of the engine, considering multiple physical parameters. Unexpected measures can be observed. For this very reason, it is important to assess if these unusual observations are statistically significant. However, anomaly detection is a difficult problem in unsupervised learning. The obvious reason is that, unlike supervised classification, there is no ground truth against which we could evaluate results. Therefore, we propose a methodology based on two independent statistical algorithms to double check our results. One approach is the Isolation Forest (IF) model which is specific to anomaly detection and able to handle a large number of variables. The goal of the algorithm is to find rare items, events or observations which raise suspicions by differing significantly from the majority of the data and, at the same time, it discriminates non-informative variables to improve. One main issue of IF is its lack of interpretability. Within this scope, we extend the shapley values, interpretation indicators, to the unsupervised context to interpret the model outputs. The second approach is the Self-Organizing Map (SOM) model which has nice properties for data mining by providing both clustering and visual representation. The performance of the method and its interpretability depends on the chosen subset of variables. In this respect, we first implement a sparse-weighted K-means to reduce the input space, allowing the SOM to give an interpretable discretized representation. We apply the two methodologies on data on aircraft engines measurements. Both approaches show similar results which are easily interpretable and exploitable by the experts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Conference of the PHM SocietySame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207