Remaining Useful Life Prediction of an Aircraft Turbofan Engine Using Deep Layer Recurrent Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The turbofan engine is a pivotal component of the aircraft. Engine components are susceptible to degradation over the life of their operation, which affects the reliability and performance of an engine. In order to direct the necessary maintenance behavior, remaining useful life prediction is the key. This research uses machine learning to provide a prediction framework for an aircraft’s remaining useful life (RUL) based on the entire life cycle data and deterioration parameter data (ML). For the engine’s lifetime assessment, a Deep Layer Recurrent Neural Network (DL-RNN) model is presented. The suggested method is compared to Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Nonlinear Auto Regressive Network with Exogenous Inputs (NARX), and Cascade Forward Neural Network (CFNN), as well as the Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) conference Challenge dataset and NASA’s C-MAPSS dataset. Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) are calculated for both the datasets, and the values are in the range of 0.15% to 0.203% for DL-RNN, whereas for the other three topologies, they are in the range of 0.2% to 4.8%. Comparative results show a better predictive accuracy with respect to other ML algorithms.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".