MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4240846507 · doi:10.1109/iccse.2018.8468704

New Trends in Machine Health Monitoring

2018· article· en· W4240846507 on OpenAlexafffund
Clarence W. de Silva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal Society of Canada
FundersKillam TrustsUniversity of CambridgeRoyal Academy of EngineeringAmerican Society for Engineering EducationEli Lilly and CompanyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malfunctions and failures in engineering systems and their components will lead to adverse and sometimes catastrophic consequences. Monitoring for impending and existing malfunctions/failures in machines and diagnosing them are of great importance in this context. With the rapid advances in sensor technologies, wireless communication, data storage, and data mining, machine health monitoring (MHM) has achieved significant capabilities to monitor the performance of an operating machine. The extensive data that may be acquired by the MHM system can be employed for evaluating the performance, detecting and diagnosing failures and estimating the health status of the monitored system. Deep learning, and particularly deep neural networks (DNNs) may be favorably employed for this purpose. It takes advantages of the massive unlabeled MHM data to learn representative features. Using very few items of labeled data, the DNN-based fault diagnosis approach can achieve superior diagnosis performance. The talk will address several such innovative approaches for machine health monitoring. The application of such an approach to an industrial machine will be presented as an illustrative example.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→