Leveraging Failure Modes and Effect Analysis for Technical Language Processing
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the evolution of data collection technologies, sensor-generated data have become the norm. However, decades of manually recorded maintenance data still hold untapped value. Natural Language Processing (NLP) offers new ways to extract insights from these historical records, especially from short, unstructured maintenance texts often accompanying structured database fields. While NLP has shown promise in this area, technical texts pose unique challenges, particularly in preprocessing and manual annotation. This study proposes a novel methodology combining Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA), a reliability engineering tool, into the NLP pipeline to enhance Named Entity Recognition (NER) in maintenance records. By leveraging the structured and domain-specific knowledge encapsulated in FMEAs, the annotation process becomes more systematic, reducing the need for exhaustive manual effort. A case study using real-world data from a major electrical utility demonstrates the effectiveness of this approach. The custom NER model, trained using FMEA-informed annotations, achieves high precision, recall, and F1 scores, successfully identifying key reliability elements in maintenance text. The integration of FMEA not only improves data quality but also supports more informed asset management decisions. This research introduces a novel cross-disciplinary framework combining reliability engineering and NLP. It highlights how domain expertise can be used to streamline annotation, improve model accuracy, and unlock actionable insights from legacy maintenance data.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it