MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407891827 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580110

Classification of Bearing Fault Signals in Rotating Machinery Using Neural Networks

2025· article· en· W4407891827 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Retz Mahima Devarapalli, John David Christopher Kontham

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Diagnostics and Reliability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBearing (navigation)Artificial neural networkFault (geology)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotating Machinery is a vital component in the manufacturing process.Its health conditions directly affect production, and any failure of the Machinery may reduce production and cause accidents.Condition-based monitoring detects faults in the early stages, which, in turn, reduces machine failures.Machine learning condition monitoring has made remarkable achievements in fault detection, but it requires various feature calculations and is a time-consuming process.Recently, deep learning-based models outperformed traditional machine learning techniques as they automatically identify features through the learning process.This paper proposes a deep-learning model to classify bearing faults, specifically a convolution Neural Network Model (CNN) and Convolution Invariant Neural Network (CINN).The bearing dataset from Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) is used for training and testing the proposed CNN and CINN Models.The performance of model is evaluated on different working conditions of the bearing faults with varying loads, demonstrating 99% and above accuracy.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicEngineering Diagnostics and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207