MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409837101 · doi:10.1016/j.ijepes.2025.110682

Enhanced insulator fault detection using optimized ensemble of deep learning models based on weighted boxes fusion

2025· article· en· W4409837101 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéfano Frizzo Stefenon, Laio Oriel Seman, Gurmail Singh, Kin‐Choong Yow

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeep learningFusionArtificial intelligenceEnsemble learningComputer scienceInsulator (electricity)Pattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fault identification in transmission line insulators is essential to keep the power system running. Using deep learning-based models combined with interpretative techniques can be an alternative to improve power grid inspections and increase their reliability. Based on that consideration, this paper proposes an optimized ensemble of deep learning models (OEDL) based on weighted boxes fusion (WBF), called OEDL-WBF, to enhance the fault detection of power grid insulators. The proposed model is hypertuned considering a tree-structured Parzen estimator (TPE), and interpretative results are provided using the eigenvector-based class activation map (Eigen-CAM) algorithm. The Eigen-CAM had better results than Grad-CAM, Activation-CAM, MaxActivation-CAM, and WeightedActivation-CAM. The multi-criteria optimization of the structure by TPE ensures that the appropriate hyperparameters of the you only look once (YOLO) model are used for object detection. With a mean average precision (mAP)@[0.5] of 0.9841 and mAP@[0.5:0.95] of 0.9722 the proposed OEDL-WBF outperforms other deep learning-based structures, such as YOLOv8, YOLOv9, YOLOv10, YOLOv11, and YOLOv12 in a benchmarking. The Eigen-CAM further helps to interpret the outcomes of the model.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Electrical Power & Energy SystemsSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207