MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408992882 · doi:10.3390/s25072175

Failure Detection in Sensors via Variational Autoencoders and Image-Based Feature Representation

2025· article· en· W4408992882 on OpenAlexafffund
Luis Miguel Moreno Moreno Haro, Adaiton Oliveira-Filho, Bruno Agard, Antoine Tahan

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieurePolytechnique Montréal
FundersMitacs
KeywordsAutoencoderInterpretabilitySkewnessComputer scienceKurtosisPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Data miningEntropy (arrow of time)Fault detection and isolationMathematicsStatisticsDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel approach for detecting sensor failures using image-based feature representation and the Convolutional Variational Autoencoder (CVAE) model. Existing methods are limited when analyzing multiple failure modes simultaneously or adapting to diverse sensor data. This limitation may compromise decision-making and system performance, hence the need for more flexible and resilient models. The proposed approach transforms sensor data into image-based feature representations of statistics such as mean, variance, kurtosis, entropy, skewness, and correlation. The CVAE is trained on such image representations, and the corresponding reconstruction error leads to a Health Index (HI) for detecting multiple sensor failures. Moreover, the CVAE latent space is used to define a complementary HI and a convenient visualization tool, enhancing the interpretability of the proposed approach. The evaluation of the proposed detection approach with data comprising diverse configurations of faulty sensors showed encouraging results. The proposed approach is illustrated in an industrial case study emerging from the aeronautical domain, with data from a complex electromechanical system comprising nearly 80 sensor measurements at a 1 Hz sampling rate. The results demonstrate the potential of the proposed method in detecting multiple sensor failures.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207