MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399246352 · doi:10.1002/qre.3595

Reliability and maintainability estimation of a multi‐failure‐cause system under imperfect maintenance

2024· article· en· W4399246352 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuality and Reliability Engineering International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaintainabilityReliability engineeringReliability (semiconductor)CovariateComputer scienceEstimationImperfectEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Estimating the reliability and maintainability (R & M) parameters is crucial in various industrial applications. It serves purposes such as evaluating system performance and safety, minimising the risk and cost of potential failures, and designing efficient maintenance strategies. This task becomes challenging for complex repairable systems, where failures can occur due to different causes and performance may be affected by various covariates (such as material, environment, and labour). Another challenge in R & M studies arises from the presence of censorship in failure times. Existing methodologies often fail to account for all the aforementioned aspects of system‐related data in R & M analysis. By incorporating valuable information from covariates and utilising data from censored failure times alongside complete failure data, the accuracy of R & M parameter estimation can be significantly improved. This paper develops reliability models for repairable systems with multiple failure causes in the presence of covariates. The system can also be subject to imperfect maintenance. The R & M parameters are then estimated by applying the Kijima Type I and II model's virtual age concept. The proposed technique is illustrated using two case studies on gas pipelines and aero‐engine systems. Through these case studies, we show that the proposed method not only provides more efficient estimates of the R & M parameters compared to the alternative approach, but it is also easier to apply and yields more straightforward interpretations.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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