PHM'11., Montréal, Québec: Canada (2011)" Improving data-driven prognostics by assessing predictability of features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Within condition based maintenance (CBM), the whole aspect of prognostics is composed of various tasks from multidimensional data to remaining useful life (RUL) of the equipment. Apart from data acquisition phase, data-driven prognostics is achieved in three main steps: features extraction and selection, features prediction, and health-state classification. The main aim of this paper is to propose a way of improving existing data-driven procedure by assessing the predictability of features when selecting them. The underlying idea is that prognostics should take into account the ability of a practitioner (or its models) to perform long term predictions. A predictability measure is thereby defined and applied to temporal predictions during the learning phase, in order to reduce the set of selected features. The proposed methodology is tested on a real data set of bearings to analyze the effectiveness of the scheme. For illustration purpose, an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system is used as a prediction model, and classification aspect is met by the well known Fuzzy C-means algorithm. Both enable to perform RUL estimation and results appear to be improved by applying the proposed strategy. 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.381 | 0.101 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".