MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417248992 · doi:10.1109/tr.2025.3639363

Smart Maintenance Optimization for Large Scale Parallel Systems Using Deep Reinforcement Learning

2025· article· W4417248992 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Reliability · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicReliability and Maintenance Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningMarkov decision processScalabilityMarkov processMaintenance engineeringComponent (thermodynamics)Process (computing)Scale (ratio)Optimal maintenance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's era of Industry 4.0, with the unprecedented availability of data and advancements in technology, it is imperative to adopt smart and dynamic maintenance scheduling, especially for large-scale systems, to harness optimal operational efficiency. In this regard, this article presents a machine learning-based maintenance decision-making framework for multiunit systems. Specifically, we apply deep reinforcement learning (DRL) to a dynamic maintenance model designed for a multiunit parallel system subject to stochastic degradation and random failures. Each unit deteriorates independently through a three-state homogeneous Markov process, transitioning between healthy, unhealthy, or failed states. We define the overall system state by combining individual component states and model their interactions using the bivariate birth/birth–death process. To minimize costs, we use the Markov decision process framework to solve the optimal maintenance policy. We evaluate and compare advanced DRL methods, including proximal policy optimization (PPO) and double deep Q-networks (DDQN), against several baseline approaches. The results show that PPO consistently outperforms all methods, providing the most effective and reliable maintenance strategies. While DDQN performs better than some baseline methods, it occasionally falls short compared to others. These findings highlight the strengths and limitations of different reinforcement learning techniques in determining optimal maintenance policies. In addition, we provide a numerical example that illustrates the use of reinforcement learning methods in a practical scenario, emphasizing the scalability and efficiency of our proposed framework for large-scale systems. Our results show exemplary performance in optimizing maintenance strategies and contribute to the advancement of smart maintenance solutions for complex industrial systems.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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