MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194661270 · doi:10.1109/tim.2021.3107009

A Smart Sensor-Based cEMD Technique for Rotor Bar Fault Detection in Induction Motors

2021· article· en· W3194661270 on OpenAlexafffund
Manzar Mahmud, Wilson Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsData acquisitionFault detection and isolationFault (geology)Rotor (electric)EngineeringHilbert–Huang transformInduction motorSidebandCondition monitoringElectronic engineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringElectrical engineeringActuatorVoltageRadio frequency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Induction motors (IMs) are commonly used in industrial and domestic applications. Reliable IM fault detection can improve machinery production quality and operation safety and prevent unexpected failures. However, reliable motor fault diagnosis is still a challenging research and development task, especially in real machinery monitoring applications, due to the limitations in data acquisition (DAQ) systems and fault detection techniques. The first objective of this work is to develop a wireless smart sensor DAQ system for the current signal measurement. The second objective is to propose a new correlation empirical mode decomposition (cEMD) technique to detect broken rotor bar faults. The proposed cEMD technique can differentiate the line current and its sideband components from other frequencies and accentuate fault features over intrinsic mode function sidebands so as to improve fault detection accuracy. The effectiveness of the developed smart sensor DAQ system and the cEMD technique is verified experimentally 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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207