MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417339022 · doi:10.1109/ictai66417.2025.00015

FiLSTM: Fuzzy Rule Induction for LSTM Model: The Case of Predictive Maintenance

2025· article· W4417339022 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelouadoud Kerarmi, Assia Kamal-Idrissi, Loubna Benabbou, Amal El Fallah Seghrouchni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityRobustness (evolution)Fuzzy logicPredictive maintenanceNeuro-fuzzyAdaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemFuzzy ruleFuzzy control system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictive Maintenance (PdM) is crucial in manufacturing, enabling early detection of equipment failures and optimized maintenance to improve reliability and reduce costs. Yet, extracting accurate and explainable predictions from complex time-series data remains challenging. Deep learning models such as Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks offer strong predictive power but act as ‘black boxes,’ while fuzzy systems provide interpretability but lack robustness in dynamic industrial settings. To address these limitations, recent studies have integrated fuzzy inference with LSTMs. In this paper, we propose FiLSTM (Fuzzy Rule Induction for LSTM), a hybrid model that leverages Decision Trees to generate fuzzy rules and membership functions directly from data. This approach enhances both interpretability and prediction, achieving higher accuracy, faster computation, and lower execution time compared to FLSTM. FiLSTM advances PdM systems toward real-time, scalable, and transparent industrial applications.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreMethods

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 topicMachine Fault Diagnosis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207