Modeling, estimation, and control of partially observable failing systems using phase method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, due to the advances in data measurement and computer technology, it has become possible to implement effective condition monitoring (CM) systems for critical equipment which increase plant productivity. The objective is to utilize the information obtained from CM for the assessment of the actual condition of the operating equipment without any unwanted interruption. In most applications, the collected CM data involves uncertainty and relates probabilistically to the exact state of the system. Most previous maintenance and reliability models in the literature do not incorporate CM information for decision making or assume that the CM system provide full information about the system true state, which often results in poor failure prediction. This research presents a new framework for predicting failures of a partially observable deteriorating system using Bayesian control techniques. The system can be in one of three-state: healthy state, an unhealthy or deteriorated state, and a failure state. Only the failure state is assumed to be observable. A vector autoregressive model is fitted to the observation process and residuals are then calculated using the fitted model, which are indicative of system deterioration. The state deterioration evolution is modeled using three-state hidden Markov model and hidden semi-Markov model. We develop optimal maintenance policy using multivariate Bayesian control approach for developed models. The posterior probability that the process operates in an unhealthy condition is updated using Bayes' rule at each sampling epoch and used for decision making. When the posterior probability exceeds a control limit, the system is stopped and full inspection is performed which reveals the true system condition. Preventive maintenance is then carried out if the system is in the unhealthy state. The objective is to find the optimal maintenance policy minimizing the long-run expected average cost. We solve the problem in the semi-Markov decision process framework. The model parameters are estimated and explicit formulas for several important quantities for the system residual life estimation are derived as functions of a posterior probability statistic. The methodologies are illustrated using simulated and the real data.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".