MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404171000 · doi:10.1088/1361-6501/ad9045

A transfer learning model for rolling bearing fault diagnosis based on texture loss strategy and nuclear norm regularization

2024· article· en· W4404171000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaofeng Yue, Zeyuan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueMeasurement Science and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEducation Department of Jilin Province
KeywordsRegularization (linguistics)Norm (philosophy)Computer scienceTransfer of learningArtificial intelligenceApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In recent years, transfer learning (TL) approaches have seen extensive application in diagnosing bearing faults due to their exceptional performance. However, mechanical noise, equipment aging, and wear lead to notable disparities and differences in the multi-level feature distributions across the source and target domain signals. The issue is addressed by proposing a TL model based on a texture loss strategy and nuclear norm regularization method. First, a feature-enhanced network is designed, which significantly improves the ability to capture local details and long-range dependencies by combining a multi-scale feature extraction module with a dilated residual module. Next, a texture loss strategy is proposed to align multi-scale features across domains by minimizing the Gram matrix of signal features. Finally, a nuclear norm regularization method is proposed to perform low-rank approximation on the signal matrix, facilitating the extraction of more robust feature data and mitigating the risk of overfitting. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method achieved an average accuracy of 98.58% on the University of Ottawa bearing fault dataset and 98.11% on the Jiangnan University bearing dataset, surpassing eight other algorithms in bearing fault diagnosis.

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)0.001
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 score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.212
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeasurement Science and TechnologySame topicGear and Bearing Dynamics AnalysisFrench-language works237,207