Diagnostic algorithms (DAs) are key to enabling automated health management. These algorithms are designed to detect and isolate anomalies of either a component or the whole system based on observations received from sensors. In recent years a wide range of algorithms, both model-based and data-driven, have been developed to increase autonomy and improve system reliability and affordability. However, the lack of support to perform systematic benchmarking of these algorithms continues to create barriers for the effective development and deployment of diagnostic technologies. In this paper, we present our efforts to benchmark a set of DAs on a common platform using a framework that was developed to evaluate and compare various performance metrics for diagnostic technologies. The diagnosed system is an electrical power system, namely the Advanced Diagnostics and Prognostics Testbed (ADAPT) developed and located at the NASA Ames Research Center. The paper presents the fundamentals of the benchmarking framework, the ADAPT system, a description of faults and data sets, the metrics used for evaluation, and an in-depth analysis of benchmarking results obtained from testing ten diagnostic algorithms on the ADAPT electrical power system testbed.
How to Cite
autonomous system, data driven prognostics, diagnostic performance, prognostic performance
(Basseville and Nikiforov, 1993) M. Basseville and I. Nikiforov. Detection of Abrupt Changes. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1993.
(de Freitas, 2001) N. de Freitas. Rao-blacklisted particle filtering for fault diagnosis. In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference (AEROCONF’01), 2001.
(Gertler and Inc., 1998) Janos J. Gertler and NetLibrary Inc. Fault detection and diagnosis in engineering systems[electronic resource]. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1998.
(Gorinevsky and Poll, 2009) D. Gorinevsky and S. Poll. Estimation of faults in dc electrical power system. In Proceedings of American Control Conference, 2009.
(Hamscher et al., 1992) W. Hamscher, L. Console, and J. de Kleer. Readings in Model-Based Diag- nosis. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, Ca, 1992.
(Iverson, 2004) D. Iverson. Inductive system health monitoring. In Proceedings of The 2004 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAI), 2004.
(Karin et al., 2006) L. Karin, R. Lunde, and B. Mu ̈nker. Model-based failure analysis with RODON. In Proceedings 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’06), 2006.
(Kavcic and Juricic, 1997) M. Kavcic and D. Juricic. A prototyping tool for fault tree based process diagnosis. In Proceedings of 8th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’1997), 1997.
(Kostelezky et al., 1990) W. Kostelezky, W. Krautter, R. Skuppin, M. Steinert, and R. Weber. The rule- based expert system Promotex I. Technical Re- port 2, ESPRIT-Project #1106, Stuttgart, 1990.
(Kurtoglu et al., 2008) T. Kurtoglu, O. J. Mengshoel, and S. Poll. A framework for systematic benchmarking of monitoring and diagnostic systems. In Annual Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society (PHM’08), 2008.
(Kurtoglu et al., 2009a) T. Kurtoglu, S. Narasimhan, S. Poll, D. Garcia, L. Kuhn, J. de Kleer, A. van Gemund, and A. Feldman. A framework for systematic benchmarking of monitoring and diagnostic systems. In Proceedings of 20th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’09), pages 383–396, 2009.
(Kurtoglu et al., 2009b) T. Kurtoglu, S. Narasimhan, S. Poll, D. Garcia, L. Kuhn, J. de Kleer, A. van Gemund, and A. Feldman. Towards a framework for evaluating and comparing diagnosis algorithms. In Proceedings of 20th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX-09), pages 373–382, 2009.
(Lerner et al., 2000) U. Lerner, R. Parr, D. Koleer, and G. Biswas. Bayesian fault detection and diagnosis in dynamic systems. In Proceedings of The Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’00), pages 531–537, 2000.
(Mengshoel, 2007) O. J. Mengshoel. Designing resource-bounded reasoners using bayesian networks: System health monitoring and diagnosis. In Proceedings of 18th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’07), pages 330–337, 2007.
(Narasimhan and Brownston, 2007) S. Narasimhan and L. Brownston. HyDE - a general framework for stochastic and hybrid model-based diagnosis. In Proceedings of 18th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’07), pages 162–169, 2007.
(Orsagh et al., 2002) R. Orsagh, M. Roemer, C. Savage, and M. Lebold. Development of performance and effectiveness metrics for gas turbine diagnostic techniques. In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference (AEROCONF’02), pages 2825–2834, 2002.
(Poll et al., 2007) S. Poll, A. Patterson-Hine, J. Camisa, D. Garcia, D. Hall, C. Lee, O. J. Mengshoel, C. Neukom, D. Nishikawa, J. Ossenfort, A. Sweet, S. Yentus, I. Roychoudhury, M. Daigle, G. Biswas, and X. Koutsoukos. Advanced diagnostics and prognostics testbed. In Proceedings of 18th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’07), 2007.
(Ricks and Mengshoel, 2009) B. Ricks and O. Mengshoel. The diagnostic challenge competition: Probabilistic techniques for fault diagnosis in electrical power systems. In Proceedings of 20th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX’09), pages 415–422, 2009.
(Roemer et al., 2005) M. Roemer, J. Dzakowic, R. Orsagh, C. Byington, and G. Vachtsevanos. Validation and verification of prognostic health management technologies. In Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Conference (AEROCONF’05), 2005.
(Roychoudhury et al., 2009) I. Roychoudhury, G. Biswas, and X. Koutsoukos. Designing distributed diagnosers for complex continuous systems. 2009.
(Simon et al., 2008) L. Simon, J. Bird, C. Davison, A. Volponi, and R. E. Iverson. Benchmarking gas path diagnostic methods: A public approach. In Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2008: Power for Land, Sea and Air, GT, 2008.
(Society of Automotive Engineers, 2007) E-32 Society of Automotive Engineers, 2007. Health and Usage Monitoring Metrics, Monitoring the Monitor, February 14, 2007, SAE ARP 5783-DRAFT.
(Sorsa and Koivo, 1998) T. Sorsa and H. Koivo. Application of artificial neural networks in process fault diagnosis. 29(4):843–849, 1998.
(Zymnis et al., 2009) A. Zymnis, S. Boyd, and D. Gorinevsky. Relaxed maximum a posteriori fault identification. 2009.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The Prognostic and Health Management Society advocates open-access to scientific data and uses a Creative Commons license for publishing and distributing any papers. A Creative Commons license does not relinquish the author’s copyright; rather it allows them to share some of their rights with any member of the public under certain conditions whilst enjoying full legal protection. By submitting an article to the International Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society, the authors agree to be bound by the associated terms and conditions including the following:
As the author, you retain the copyright to your Work. By submitting your Work, you are granting anybody the right to copy, distribute and transmit your Work and to adapt your Work with proper attribution under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States license. You assign rights to the Prognostics and Health Management Society to publish and disseminate your Work through electronic and print media if it is accepted for publication. A license note citing the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License as shown below needs to be placed in the footnote on the first page of the article.
First Author et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.