Generative Adversarial Network-based Missing Data Handling and Remaining Useful Life Estimation for Smart Train Control and Monitoring Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As railway is considered one of the most significant transports, sudden malfunction of train components or delayed maintenance may considerably disrupt societal activities. To prevent this issue, various railway maintenance frameworks, from “periodic time-based and distance-based traditional maintenance frameworks” to “monitoring/conditional-based maintenance systems,” have been proposed and developed. However, these maintenance frameworks depend on the current status and situations of trains and cars. To overcome these issues, several predictive frameworks have been proposed. This study proposes a new and effective remaining useful life (RUL) estimation framework using big data from a train control and monitoring system (TCMS). TCMS data is classified into two types: operation data and alarm data. Alarm or RUL information is extracted from the alarm data. Subsequently, a deep learning model achieves the mapping relationship between operation data and the extracted RUL. However, a number of TCMS data have missing values due to malfunction of embedded sensors and/or low life of monitoring modules. This issue is addressed in the proposed generative adversarial network (GAN) framework. Both deep neural network (DNN) models for a generator and a predictor estimate missing values and predict train fault, simultaneously. To prove the effectiveness of the proposed GAN-based predictive maintenance framework, TCMS data-based case studies and comparisons with other methods were carried out.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".