MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Coupled Gaussian Mixtures For Modal Analysis: EM Inference and CramÉr-Rao Bounds

2025· article· W7135009206 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Berezin, Yann Rotrou, Jean-Yves Tourneret, F. Vincent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaussian processGaussianModalInferenceNoise (video)Expectation–maximization algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Order-Based Modal Analysis estimates resonances at frequencies that are integer multiples of a rotating machine’s speed. These resonances are represented as a cloud of frequency-versus-speed intersections revealing the natural modes of the mechanical structure. This paper shows that grouping these intersections can be cast as inference in a coupled affine Gaussian mixture model where each mode is represented by a straight line shared across all harmonic orders, while a uniform component captures outliers. A dedicated expectation maximisation (EM) algorithm is investigated for this model, estimating mixture weights in closed form and the other model parameters through a one-dimensional search. Cramér-Rao lower bounds are derived for the joint estimation of slopes, intercepts and mixing proportions in the proposed statistical model allowing performance of the estimators of the unknown parameters to be studied. Monte-Carlo simulations illustrate how the variances of EM estimates approach those bounds. Applied to data from an industrial turbomachine, the method extracts modal lines whose characteristics agree with historical benchmarks, despite strong deterministic harmonics and regime-dependent drifts.

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 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), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207