MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216753264 · doi:10.4271/03-15-04-0027

Fault Detection and Diagnosis of Engine Spark Plugs Using Deep Learning Techniques

2021· article· en· W3216753264 on OpenAlexaff
Yixin Huangfu, Essam Seddik, Saeid Habibi, Alan Wassyng, Jimi Tjong

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Engines · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSPARK (programming language)Fault (geology)Automotive engineeringFault detection and isolationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineeringGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>Fault Detection and Diagnosis (FDD) is playing an increasingly important role in the automotive sector as it moves toward Advanced Technology Vehicles. Reducing the cost of sensory equipment to detect faults in Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs) has always been a common desire for automotive researchers. This article offers an Artificial Intelligence approach for detecting engine combustion faults related to spark plugs using existing sensors. The study investigates two deep learning models that are capable of learning different fault conditions from historical sensory data. The two customized models, one Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network and one Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) model, are proposed to tackle this task. The LSTM model processes the filtered sensor data in time series, while the CNN model uses the frequency map that is novel in the learning-based engine diagnosis field. A comprehensive engine fault dataset is collected and includes a variety of operating conditions in relation to engine speed, engine load, and test time. Evaluation results using this dataset show successful detection of the fault conditions with high accuracy. In the meantime, the results also reveal some unstable performance outside of given operating conditions.</div>

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of EnginesSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207