MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416922211 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3639515

A Machine Learning Model of Electro-Hydrostatic Actuators With the Low-Data Limit and Its Application to Fault Detection

2025· article· W4416922211 on OpenAlexafffund
Soleiman Hosseinpour, Witold Kinsner, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicHydraulic and Pneumatic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsActuatorNonlinear systemFault detection and isolationBayesian optimizationBayesian probabilityLimit (mathematics)Uncertainty quantificationLeakage (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel approach for modeling the dynamics of electro-hydrostatic actuators (EHAs) using the sparse identification of nonlinear dynamics (SINDy) algorithm. SINDy is a machine learning algorithm that identifies governing equations from input-output data. It is a suitable algorithm, especially when there is access to only a limited number of datasets. Due to the nonlinearity in dynamics, the SINDy algorithm can be a useful tool to provide a framework to accurately capture the complex dynamics of EHAs, even with limited data. One of the challenges when using the SINDy algorithm is tuning its hyperparameters. We employ Bayesian optimization to find the optimal parameters in the SINDy algorithm. To show the performance of the method, comprehensive simulations and experimental validations have been conducted. The proposed method demonstrates superior performance in modeling the behavior of EHAs under various inputs by only considering the input voltage, position, and velocity data. Deriving the dynamic equations for the EHA opens doors for a variety of other engineering applications, such as condition monitoring. The proposed SINDy modeling approach is further used for actuator leakage fault detection, which achieves a classification accuracy of 95.56% in distinguishing between healthy and faulty datasets under diverse conditions, including varying load and leakage levels.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicHydraulic and Pneumatic SystemsFrench-language works237,207