MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409923785 · doi:10.3390/app15094828

Enhanced Rolling Bearing Fault Diagnosis Using Multimodal Deep Learning and Singular Spectrum Analysis

2025· article· en· W4409923785 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yunhang Wang, Hongwei Wang, Ruoyang Bai, Yuxin Shi, Xipu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Xinjiang
KeywordsSingular spectrum analysisBearing (navigation)Fault (geology)Artificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)GeologySingular value decompositionSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A decision-level multimodal fusion deep learning strategy is proposed for the effective fault detection of rolling bearings based on long-term fault signals collected from multiple sensors. First, key features are extracted from the multimodal signal set using singular spectrum analysis (SSA), and these features are transformed into a composite dataset that combines short-time Fourier transform (STFT) images and time series data. Based on this, a recursive gated convolutional neural network (RGCNN) is designed to process the STFT image data, while a 1D convolutional neural network (1DCNN) is specifically optimized for training with time series data. Furthermore, decision-level multimodal feature fusion is achieved by applying a weighted average method to integrate the features from different deep learning models, aiming to obtain more comprehensive fault prediction results. The proposed method, multimodal fusion fault detection (MFFD), is validated on the Paderborn and Ottawa rolling bearing datasets, which include various typical faults. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach. Compared to traditional single-modality deep learning models, the proposed method shows significant improvements in fault diagnosis accuracy and generalization capability.

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)0.000
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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207