MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intelligent Systems for Machine Condition Monitoring and Fault Diagnostics

2025· article· W7144331349 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

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence & Cloud Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondition monitoringFault (geology)Process (computing)Fuzzy logicFault detection and isolationArtificial neural networkSignal processingData acquisitionSIGNAL (programming language)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable machine condition monitoring systems are critically needed in industries to recognize equipment defects at their earliest stage so as to improve production quality, operation efficiency and safety. An intelligent monitoring system consists of modules such as data acquisition, signal processing, and diagnostics. Smart sensor-based data acquisition systems are used to collect signals wirelessly. Signal processing is a process to extract representative features from measurement for system analysis and fault detection in machinery systems. Diagnosis is a procedure to classify features/patterns into different categories corresponding to different equipment health states. New soft computing tools such as evolving neural fuzzy methods are used in automatic diagnostic classification. Appropriate machine learning algorithms can be used to improve decision-making convergence and adaptive capability to accommodate different machinery conditions.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.318 · 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