Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

A Change Point Detection Integrated Remaining Useful Life Estimation Model under Variable Operating Conditions (2401.04351v1)

Published 9 Jan 2024 in cs.LG, cs.AI, and eess.SP

Abstract: By informing the onset of the degradation process, health status evaluation serves as a significant preliminary step for reliable remaining useful life (RUL) estimation of complex equipment. This paper proposes a novel temporal dynamics learning-based model for detecting change points of individual devices, even under variable operating conditions, and utilises the learnt change points to improve the RUL estimation accuracy. During offline model development, the multivariate sensor data are decomposed to learn fused temporal correlation features that are generalisable and representative of normal operation dynamics across multiple operating conditions. Monitoring statistics and control limit thresholds for normal behaviour are dynamically constructed from these learnt temporal features for the unsupervised detection of device-level change points. The detected change points then inform the degradation data labelling for training a long short-term memory (LSTM)-based RUL estimation model. During online monitoring, the temporal correlation dynamics of a query device is monitored for breach of the control limit derived in offline training. If a change point is detected, the device's RUL is estimated with the well-trained offline model for early preventive action. Using C-MAPSS turbofan engines as the case study, the proposed method improved the accuracy by 5.6\% and 7.5\% for two scenarios with six operating conditions, when compared to existing LSTM-based RUL estimation models that do not consider heterogeneous change points.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (49)
  1. X. S. Si, W. Wang, C. H. Hu, and D. H. Zhou, “Remaining useful life estimation–A review on the statistical data driven approaches,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 213, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2011.
  2. C. Ordóñez, F. S. Lasheras, J. Roca-Pardinas, and F. J. de Cos Juez, “A hybrid ARIMA–SVM model for the study of the remaining useful life of aircraft engines,” Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 346, pp. 184–191, 2019.
  3. M. Wang and J. Wang, “CHMM for tool condition monitoring and remaining useful life prediction,” The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 463–471, 2012.
  4. C. Zheng, W. Liu, B. Chen, D. Gao, Y. Cheng, Y. Yang, X. Zhang, S. Li, Z. Huang, and J. Peng, “A data-driven approach for remaining useful life prediction of aircraft engines,” in 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 184–189.
  5. Y. Chen, D. Zhang, and W.-a. Zhang, “MSWR-LRCN: A new deep learning approach to remaining useful life estimation of bearings,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 118, p. 104969, 2022.
  6. J. Zhu, N. Chen, and W. Peng, “Estimation of bearing remaining useful life based on multiscale convolutional neural network,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 66, no. 4, pp. 3208–3216, 2018.
  7. M. Xia, T. Li, T. Shu, J. Wan, C. W. De Silva, and Z. Wang, “A two-stage approach for the remaining useful life prediction of bearings using deep neural networks,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 3703–3711, 2018.
  8. M. Ma and Z. Mao, “Deep-convolution-based LSTM network for remaining useful life prediction,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1658–1667, 2020.
  9. S. Wu, Y. Jiang, H. Luo, and S. Yin, “Remaining useful life prediction for ion etching machine cooling system using deep recurrent neural network-based approaches,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 109, p. 104748, 2021.
  10. W. Huang, H. Khorasgani, C. Gupta, A. Farahat, and S. Zheng, “Remaining useful life estimation for systems with abrupt failures,” in Annual conference of the PHM society. September, 2018, pp. 24–27.
  11. S. Xiang, Y. Qin, J. Luo, H. Pu, and B. Tang, “Multicellular LSTM-based deep learning model for aero-engine remaining useful life prediction,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 216, p. 107927, 2021.
  12. X. Zhang, Y. Qin, C. Yuen, L. Jayasinghe, and X. Liu, “Time-series regeneration with convolutional recurrent generative adversarial network for remaining useful life estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 6820–6831, 2021.
  13. L. Liu, X. Song, and Z. Zhou, “Aircraft engine remaining useful life estimation via a double attention-based data-driven architecture,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 221, p. 108330, 2022.
  14. C. Zhang, P. Lim, A. K. Qin, and K. C. Tan, “Multiobjective deep belief networks ensemble for remaining useful life estimation in prognostics,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 2306–2318, 2016.
  15. Y. Mo, L. Li, B. Huang, and X. Li, “Few-shot RUL estimation based on model-agnostic meta-learning,” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 2359–2372, 2023.
  16. A. Arunan, Y. Qin, X. Li, and C. Yuen, “A federated learning-based industrial health prognostics for heterogeneous edge devices using matched feature extraction,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, pp. 1–15, 2023.
  17. K. Liu, Z. Wei, C. Zhang, Y. Shang, R. Teodorescu, and Q.-L. Han, “Towards long lifetime battery: AI-based manufacturing and management,” IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2022.
  18. Y. Qin, S. Adams, and C. Yuen, “A transfer learning-based state of charge estimation for lithium-ion battery at varying ambient temperatures,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 7304–7315, 2021.
  19. Z. Chen, L. Chen, W. Shen, and K. Xu, “Remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion battery via a sequence decomposition and deep learning integrated approach,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 1466–1479, 2021.
  20. S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber, “Long short-term memory,” Neural Computation, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 1735–1780, 1997.
  21. S. Zheng, K. Ristovski, A. Farahat, and C. Gupta, “Long short-term memory network for remaining useful life estimation,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management (ICPHM).   IEEE, 2017, pp. 88–95.
  22. Z. Chen, M. Wu, R. Zhao, F. Guretno, R. Yan, and X. Li, “Machine remaining useful life prediction via an attention-based deep learning approach,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 2521–2531, 2020.
  23. C. G. Huang, H. Z. Huang, and Y. F. Li, “A bidirectional LSTM prognostics method under multiple operational conditions,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 8792–8802, 2019.
  24. Y. Liao, L. Zhang, and C. Liu, “Uncertainty prediction of remaining useful life using long short-term memory network based on bootstrap method,” in 2018 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.   IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–8.
  25. Z. Wu, S. Yu, X. Zhu, Y. Ji, and M. Pecht, “A weighted deep domain adaptation method for industrial fault prognostics according to prior distribution of complex working conditions,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 139 802–139 814, 2019.
  26. Z. Shi and A. Chehade, “A dual-LSTM framework combining change point detection and remaining useful life prediction,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety, vol. 205, p. 107257, 2021.
  27. F. O. Heimes, “Recurrent neural networks for remaining useful life estimation,” in 2008 international conference on prognostics and health management.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–6.
  28. Y. Wu, M. Yuan, S. Dong, L. Lin, and Y. Liu, “Remaining useful life estimation of engineered systems using vanilla LSTM neural networks,” Neurocomputing, vol. 275, pp. 167–179, 2018.
  29. S. Greenbank and D. A. Howey, “Piecewise-linear modelling with automated feature selection for li-ion battery end-of-life prognosis,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 184, p. 109612, 2023.
  30. P. E. P. Odiowei and Y. Cao, “Nonlinear dynamic process monitoring using canonical variate analysis and kernel density estimations,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 36–45, 2009.
  31. A. Saxena, K. Goebel, D. Simon, and N. Eklund, “Damage propagation modeling for aircraft engine run-to-failure simulation,” in 2008 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management.   IEEE, 2008, pp. 1–9.
  32. F. J. Massey Jr, “The kolmogorov-smirnov test for goodness of fit,” Journal of the American statistical Association, vol. 46, no. 253, pp. 68–78, 1951.
  33. S. Kullback and R. A. Leibler, “On information and sufficiency,” The annals of mathematical statistics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 79–86, 1951.
  34. C. Ruiz-Cárcel, Y. Cao, D. Mba, L. Lao, and R. Samuel, “Statistical process monitoring of a multiphase flow facility,” Control Engineering Practice, vol. 42, pp. 74–88, 2015.
  35. S. J. Kim, S. H. Kim, H. M. Lee, S. H. Lim, G.-Y. Kwon, and Y.-J. Shin, “State of health estimation of li-ion batteries using multi-input lstm with optimal sequence length,” in 2020 IEEE 29th International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 1336–1341.
  36. J. Zhang, P. Wang, R. Yan, and R. X. Gao, “Deep learning for improved system remaining life prediction,” Procedia Cirp, vol. 72, pp. 1033–1038, 2018.
  37. T. Tieleman and G. Hinton, “Rmsprop: Divide the gradient by a running average of its recent magnitude. coursera: Neural networks for machine learning,” COURSERA Neural Networks Mach. Learn, vol. 17, 2012.
  38. D. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” in International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), San Diego, CA, USA, 2015.
  39. Y. Bengio, “Practical recommendations for gradient-based training of deep architectures,” in Neural Networks: Tricks of the Trade: Second Edition.   Springer, 2012, pp. 437–478.
  40. P. Baldi and P. J. Sadowski, “Understanding dropout,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 26, 2013.
  41. F. Li, L. Zhang, B. Chen, D. Gao, Y. Cheng, X. Zhang, Y. Yang, K. Gao, Z. Huang, and J. Peng, “A light gradient boosting machine for remainning useful life estimation of aircraft engines,” in 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).   IEEE, 2018, pp. 3562–3567.
  42. Z. Ma, J. Guo, S. Mao, and T. Gu, “An interpretability research of the XGBoost algorithm in remaining useful life prediction,” in 2020 International Conference on Big Data & Artificial Intelligence & Software Engineering (ICBASE).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 433–438.
  43. C. Zhao, X. Huang, Y. Li, and S. Li, “A novel cap-LSTM model for remaining useful life prediction,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 21, no. 20, pp. 23 498–23 509, 2021.
  44. A. Boujamza and S. L. Elhaq, “Attention-based LSTM for remaining useful life estimation of aircraft engines,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 450–455, 2022.
  45. U. Amin and K. D. Kumar, “Remaining useful life prediction of aircraft engines using hybrid model based on artificial intelligence techniques,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management (ICPHM).   IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–10.
  46. M. Sayah, D. Guebli, Z. Noureddine, and Z. Al Masry, “Deep LSTM enhancement for RUL prediction using Gaussian mixture models,” Automatic Control and Computer Sciences, vol. 55, pp. 15–25, 2021.
  47. W. E. Larimore, “Canonical variate analysis in control and signal processing,” Statistical methods in control and signal processing, pp. 83–120, 1997.
  48. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  49. X. Fu, K. Huang, E. E. Papalexakis, H.-A. Song, P. P. Talukdar, N. D. Sidiropoulos, C. Faloutsos, and T. Mitchell, “Efficient and distributed algorithms for large-scale generalized canonical correlations analysis,” in 2016 IEEE 16th international conference on data mining (ICDM).   IEEE, 2016, pp. 871–876.
Citations (5)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now