MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415735484 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-22047-6

From performance to prediction: extracting aging data from the effects of base load aging on washing machines for a machine learning model

2025· article· en· W4415735484 on OpenAlexaff
Shaojin Ma, Xue Bai, Yan Bai, J.F. Shao, Shuai Yuan, Junyu Gao, Jian Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryRobustness (evolution)Accelerated agingReliability (semiconductor)Base (topology)Degradation (telecommunications)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The standard testing of washing machine performance faces reliability challenges, which stem from the uncontrollable degradation of base load. This study provided a quantified standard for base load age to enhance the reliability and stability of the washing machine performance testing process. First, the impact of base load aging on the cleaning performance and water extraction performance was investigated. Simultaneously, the changes in reflectance of the base load were recorded. Then, MLR and ANN models were developed using the remaining moisture content and reflectance of the base load to predict base load age. It was found that the water extraction performance is more easily affected by the aging of the base load than the cleaning performance. In addition, ANN has better performance in predicting base load age, resulting in an R c 2 of 0.978, RMSEC of 9.295 h, and R cv 2 of 0.972 h, RMSECV of 10.639 h for the front-loading washing machine, and R c 2 of 0.958, RMSEC of 12.948 h, and R cv 2 of 0.940, RMSECV of 15.572 h for the top-loading washing machine. This study establishes a theoretical foundation for optimizing base load age regulation. Further study could expand the sample size to enhance the robustness and generalizability of the proposed method.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207