MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207539510 · doi:10.4236/jsip.2021.124004

Improved Bearing Fault Diagnosis by Feature Extraction Based on GLCM, Fusion of Selection Methods, and Multiclass-Naïve Bayes Classification

2021· article· en· W3207539510 on OpenAlexaff
Mireille Pouyap, Laurent Bitjoka, Etienne Mfoumou, Denis Toko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Signal and Information Processing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Community College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMerge (version control)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature selectionFeature extractionPrincipal component analysisNaive Bayes classifierBearing (navigation)Classifier (UML)Support vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of bearing faults reduces the efficiency of rotating machines and thus increases energy consumption or even the total stoppage of the machine. It becomes essential to correctly diagnose the fault caused by the bearing. Hence the importance of determining an effective features extraction method that best describes the fault. The vision of this paper is to merge the features selection methods in order to define the most relevant featuresin the texture of the vibration signal images. In this study, the Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix (GLCM) in texture analysis is applied on the vibration signal represented in images. Features selection based on the merge of PCA (Principal component Analysis) method and SFE (Sequential Features Extraction) method is done to obtain the most relevant features. The multiclass-Na?ve Bayesclassifier is used to test the proposed approach. The success rate of this classification is 98.27%. The relevant features obtained give promising results and are more efficient than the methods observed in the literature.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Signal and Information ProcessingSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207