Incremental Learning-Enabled Fault Diagnosis of Dynamic Systems: A Comprehensive Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Effective fault diagnosis is crucial for maintaining the reliability and safety of industrial systems. Incremental learning, which enables models to continuously update and adapt to new data or emerging fault classes without complete retraining, has recently gained attention as a promising solution for addressing nonstationary data streams in fault diagnosis applications. Nevertheless, most existing review articles on fault diagnosis adopt a broad perspective, primarily discussing general techniques such as deep learning and transfer learning, without providing a dedicated focus on incremental learning strategies. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first review focusing specifically on incremental learning-enabled fault diagnosis methods. In this work, state-of-the-art incremental learning-enabled fault diagnosis are systematically reviewed. These methods are categorized into distinct groups based on their incremental learning strategies and application contexts. In addition, major challenges associated with applying incremental learning to fault diagnosis, including concept drift and catastrophic forgetting, are discussed, along with emerging solutions proposed to address these issues. A novel taxonomy and perspective on incremental learning-enabled fault diagnosis approaches is presented, providing a timely and comprehensive reference for researchers and practitioners in this evolving field.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".