MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396217134 · doi:10.3390/electronics13091721

Explainable Artificial Intelligence Approach for Diagnosing Faults in an Induction Furnace

2024· article· en· W4396217134 on OpenAlexaff
Sajad Moosavi, Roozbeh Razavi‐Far, Vasile Palade, Mehrdad Saif

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityArtificial neural networkOutlierDeep learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningHarmonicsFault (geology)Measure (data warehouse)Reliability engineeringVoltageData miningPattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For over a century, induction furnaces have been used in the core of foundries for metal melting and heating. They provide high melting/heating rates with optimal efficiency. The occurrence of faults not only imposes safety risks but also reduces productivity due to unscheduled shutdowns. The problem of diagnosing faults in induction furnaces has not yet been studied, and this work is the first to propose a data-driven framework for diagnosing faults in this application. This paper presents a deep neural network framework for diagnosing electrical faults by measuring real-time electrical parameters at the supply side. Experimental and sensory measurements are collected from multiple energy analyzer devices installed in the foundry. Next, a semi-supervised learning approach, known as the local outlier factor, has been used to discriminate normal and faulty samples from each other and label the data samples. Then, a deep neural network is trained with the collected labeled samples. The performance of the developed model is compared with several state-of-the-art techniques in terms of various performance metrics. The results demonstrate the superior performance of the selected deep neural network model over other classifiers, with an average F-measure of 0.9187. Due to the black box nature of the constructed neural network, the model predictions are interpreted by Shapley additive explanations and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations. The interpretability analysis reveals that classified faults are closely linked to variations in odd voltage/current harmonics of order 3, 11, 13, and 17, highlighting the critical impact of these parameters on the model’s prediction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207