Abstract

Research into the use of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms within the field of prognostics and health management (PHM), in particular for predicting the remaining useful life (RUL) of mechanical systems that are subject to condition monitoring, has gained widespread attention in recent years. It is important to establish confidence levels for RUL predictions, so as to aid operators as well as regulators in making informed decisions regarding maintenance and asset life-cycle planning. Over the past decade, many researchers have devised indicators or metrics for determining the performance of AI algorithms in RUL prediction. While most of the popularly used metrics like Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), etc. were adapted from other applications, some bespoke metrics are designed and intended specifically for use in PHM research. This study provides a synopsis of key performance indicators (KPIs) that are applied to AI-driven PHM technologies of mechanical systems. It presents details of the application scenarios, suitability of using a particular metric in different scenarios, the pros and cons of each metric, the trade-offs that may need to be made in choosing one metric over another, and some other factors that engineers should take into account when applying the metrics.

Highlights

  • Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) involves assessing the health state of systems, sub-systems or components throughout their lifecycle with a view towards avoiding unexpected failures as well as possibly extending their useful life [1]

  • The current study provides a synopsis of the key performance indicators (KPIs) and metrics that are being used for artificial intelligence (AI)-driven prognostics and health management (PHM) of mechanical systems and equipment

  • Work A significant amount of effort has been put into the attempt to develop performance metrics for AI algorithms used in PHM research

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) involves assessing the health state of systems, sub-systems or components throughout their lifecycle with a view towards avoiding unexpected failures as well as possibly extending their useful life [1]. Even though the statistical-based metrics are popular and still widely in use, some researchers have developed bespoke performance measures for PHM algorithms. Given that the fundamental approach used to determine the performance of a PHM algorithm relies on comparing the predicted RUL value with the true value, the statistical-based measures are by far the most common metrics being adopted.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call