MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416295981 · doi:10.3390/make7040147

Adaptive Multi-View Hypergraph Learning for Cross-Condition Bearing Fault Diagnosis

2025· article· en· W4416295981 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Y. Li, Kyaw Hlaing Bwar, Rifai Chai, Kwong Ming Tse, Boon Xian Chai

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning and Knowledge Extraction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)HypergraphFeature (linguistics)Fault (geology)Feature learningFusionSimilarity (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable bearing fault diagnosis across diverse operating conditions remains a fundamental challenge in intelligent maintenance. Traditional data-driven models often struggle to generalize due to the limited ability to represent complex and heterogeneous feature relationships. To address this issue, this paper presents an Adaptive Multi-view Hypergraph Learning (AMH) framework for cross-condition bearing fault diagnosis. The proposed approach first constructs multiple feature views from time-domain, frequency-domain, and time–frequency representations to capture complementary diagnostic information. Within each view, an adaptive hyperedge generation strategy is introduced to dynamically model high-order correlations by jointly considering feature similarity and operating condition relevance. The resulting hypergraph embeddings are then integrated through an attention-based fusion module that adaptively emphasizes the most informative views for fault classification. Extensive experiments on the Case Western Reserve University and Ottawa bearing datasets demonstrate that AMH consistently outperforms conventional graph-based and deep learning baselines in terms of classification precision, recall, and F1-score under cross-condition settings. The ablation studies further confirm the importance of adaptive hyperedge construction and attention-guided multi-view fusion in improving robustness and generalization. These results highlight the strong potential of the proposed framework for practical intelligent fault diagnosis in complex industrial environments.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachine Learning and Knowledge ExtractionSame topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207