MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310535409 · doi:10.3390/s22239369

An AVMD-DBN-ELM Model for Bearing Fault Diagnosis

2022· article· en· W4310535409 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xue Lei, Ningyun Lu, Chuang Chen, Cunsong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAero Engine Corporation of ChinaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilState Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical StructuresNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFault (geology)Bearing (navigation)Hilbert–Huang transformComputer scienceDeep belief networkArtificial intelligenceVibrationSortingPattern recognition (psychology)Set (abstract data type)sortSimilarity (geometry)EngineeringData miningAlgorithmDeep learningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotating machinery often works under complex and variable working conditions; the vibration signals that are widely used for the health monitoring of rotating machinery show extremely complicated dynamic frequency characteristics. It is unlikely that a few certain frequency components are used as the representative fault signatures for all working conditions. Aiming at a general solution, this paper proposes an intelligent bearing fault diagnosis method that integrates adaptive variational mode decomposition (AVMD), mode sorting based deep belief network (DBN) and extreme learning machine (ELM). It can adaptively decompose non-stationery vibration signals into temporary frequency components and sort out a set of effective frequency components for online fault diagnosis. For online implementation, a similarity matching method is proposed, which can match the online-obtained frequency-domain fault signatures with the historical fault signatures, and the parameters of AVMD-DBN-ELM model are set to be the same as the most similar case. The proposed method can decompose vibration signals into different modes adaptively and retain effective modes, and it can learn from the idea of an attention mechanism and fuse the results according to the weight of MIV. It also can improve the timeliness of the fault diagnosis. For comprehensive verification of the proposed method, the bearing dataset from the University of Ottawa is used, and some recent methods are repeated for comparative analysis. The results can prove that our proposed method has higher reliability, higher accuracy and higher efficiency.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207