Evaluating algorithm performance metrics tailored for prognostics

A. Saxena, J. Celaya, B. Saha, S. Saha, K. Goebel
{"title":"Evaluating algorithm performance metrics tailored for prognostics","authors":"A. Saxena, J. Celaya, B. Saha, S. Saha, K. Goebel","doi":"10.1109/AERO.2009.4839666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prognostics has taken center stage in Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) where it is desired to estimate Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a system so that remedial measures may be taken in advance to avoid catastrophic events or unwanted downtimes. Validation of such predictions is an important but difficult proposition and a lack of appropriate evaluation methods renders prognostics meaningless. Evaluation methods currently used in the research community are not standardized and in many cases do not sufficiently assess key performance aspects expected out of a prognostics algorithm. In this paper we introduce several new evaluation metrics tailored for prognostics and show that they can effectively evaluate various algorithms as compared to other conventional metrics. Four prognostic algorithms, Relevance Vector Machine (RVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), and Polynomial Regression (PR), are compared. These algorithms vary in complexity and their ability to manage uncertainty around predicted estimates. Results show that the new metrics rank these algorithms in a different manner; depending on the requirements and constraints suitable metrics may be chosen. Beyond these results, this paper offers ideas about how metrics suitable to prognostics may be designed so that the evaluation procedure can be standardized.","PeriodicalId":117250,"journal":{"name":"2009 IEEE Aerospace conference","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"116","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2009 IEEE Aerospace conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2009.4839666","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 116

Abstract

Prognostics has taken center stage in Condition Based Maintenance (CBM) where it is desired to estimate Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a system so that remedial measures may be taken in advance to avoid catastrophic events or unwanted downtimes. Validation of such predictions is an important but difficult proposition and a lack of appropriate evaluation methods renders prognostics meaningless. Evaluation methods currently used in the research community are not standardized and in many cases do not sufficiently assess key performance aspects expected out of a prognostics algorithm. In this paper we introduce several new evaluation metrics tailored for prognostics and show that they can effectively evaluate various algorithms as compared to other conventional metrics. Four prognostic algorithms, Relevance Vector Machine (RVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Artificial Neural Network (ANN), and Polynomial Regression (PR), are compared. These algorithms vary in complexity and their ability to manage uncertainty around predicted estimates. Results show that the new metrics rank these algorithms in a different manner; depending on the requirements and constraints suitable metrics may be chosen. Beyond these results, this paper offers ideas about how metrics suitable to prognostics may be designed so that the evaluation procedure can be standardized.
评估为预测量身定制的算法性能指标
在基于状态的维护(CBM)中,预测已经占据了中心位置,它需要估计系统的剩余使用寿命(RUL),以便提前采取补救措施以避免灾难性事件或不必要的停机时间。这种预测的验证是一个重要但困难的命题,缺乏适当的评估方法使预测毫无意义。目前在研究界使用的评估方法是不标准化的,并且在许多情况下不能充分评估预测算法所期望的关键性能方面。在本文中,我们介绍了为预测量身定制的几个新的评估指标,并表明与其他传统指标相比,它们可以有效地评估各种算法。对相关向量机(RVM)、高斯过程回归(GPR)、人工神经网络(ANN)和多项式回归(PR)四种预测算法进行了比较。这些算法在复杂性和管理预测估计不确定性的能力上各不相同。结果表明,新指标以不同的方式对这些算法进行排名;根据需求和约束,可以选择合适的度量标准。除了这些结果之外,本文还提供了一些关于如何设计适合于预测的度量标准以使评估程序标准化的想法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信