Machine Learning for Monitoring of the Solenoid Valves Coil Resistance Based on Optical Fiber Squeezer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solenoid valves represent indispensable elements in various engineering systems. Their failure can lead to unexpected problems. This failure may be caused by fluctuations in the coil resistance of the electromagnetic solenoid (EMS) which actuates these solenoid valves. Hence the need to monitor this parameter for a preventive maintenance of these actuators. The proposed method consists to use supervised machine learning to monitor coil resistance of the EMS valve. The EMS valve is coupled to an optical fiber squeezer which, acts as a force sensor. The solenoid armature applies a mechanical force to the optical fiber and changes the polarization state of the light that travels through the optical fiber and then this force infects the power of the light. A Simulink model is used to determine the open loop system step response. The identification of the system allows obtaining its transfer function, which depends on the parameters of the EMS and in particular on its coil resistance. By varying the coil resistance while fixing the other physical parameters of the EMS, we generate a database whose elements are the coefficients of the transfer function of the solenoid open loop and the electrical resistance of its coil. The generated database is used for training several supervised machine learning models whose predictors are the elements of the transfer function; the response is the coil resistance. The Gaussian process for regression allows to predict the variations of the coil resistance with the smallest relative error although it takes a relatively long time for the training compared to the other models used.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".