基于多属性群决策的柴油机故障证据融合方法

  • 王承远 ,
  • 徐久军 ,
  • 严志军
展开
  • (大连海事大学 轮机工程学院, 辽宁 大连 116026) 
王承远(1983-),男,博士生,研究方向:智能控制与故障诊断.

收稿日期: 2017-11-24

  修回日期: 2018-04-01

  网络出版日期: 2024-06-27

基金资助

国家自然科学基金资助项目 (51509029);辽宁省教育厅基金资助项目(L2015065);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目(3132015032).

Evidence fusion method for diesel engine fault based on multi-attribute group decision making

  • WANG Cheng-yuan ,
  • XU Jiu-jun ,
  • YAN Zhi-jun
Expand
  • Marine Engineering College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026,China)

Received date: 2017-11-24

  Revised date: 2018-04-01

  Online published: 2024-06-27

摘要

鉴于复杂机械系统中故障信息的不完备及不确定性造成证据理论在故障诊断决策级阶段融合的准确性问题,提出基于多属性群决策的故障证据融合方法.利用多属性群决策的属性分析,计算基于元素属性集合的决策体差异权重,以减小融合证据源的差异;结合柴油机目标故障的相似依赖关系,利用目标故障的可信度权重对冲突焦元信息再分配,旨在提高证据融合的准确性.对R6105AZLD柴油机台架试验结果表明:本文方法可大幅提高诊断准确度和鲁棒性.

本文引用格式

王承远 , 徐久军 , 严志军 . 基于多属性群决策的柴油机故障证据融合方法[J]. 大连海事大学学报, 2018 , 44(3) : 71 -78 . DOI: 10.16411/j.cnki.issn1006-7736.2018.03.011

Abstract

In view of accuracy of evidence theory in the stage of fault diagnosis decision fusion by incompleteness and uncertainty of fault information in complex mechanical systems, the method of fault evidence fusion based on multi-attribute group decision making was proposed. By using attribute analysis of multi-attribute group decision making, the weight of decision body based on element attribute set was calculated to reduce the difference of fusion evidence sources. Based on the similarity dependence of the target fault of the diesel engine, by using the reliability weight of the target fault, the conflicting focal element was redistributed to improve the accuracy of the evidence fusion. The results of R6105AZLD diesel engine bench test show that the proposed method can greatly improve diagnostic accuracy and robustness.

参考文献

[1] YAGER R R. On the Dempster-Shafer Framework and New Combination Rules[J]. Information Sciences, 1987, 41[2]:93-137.
[2] Murphy C K. Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts[J]. Decision Support Systems, 2000, 29(1):1-9. [3] Ibrahim J G, Chen M, Gwon Yetal. The power prior: theory and applications[J]. Statistics in Medicine, 2015, 34(28): 3724-3749.
[4] SMARANDACHE F, DEZERT J. Advances and Applications of DSmT for Information Fusion Vol.3[M] .American Research Press,Rehoboth,2009.
[5] Bhalla D, Bansal R K, Gupta H O. Integrating AI Based DGA Fault Diagnosis Using Demper-Shafer Theory[J]. International Journal of Electronical Power&Energy System,2013,48(10): 31-38.
[6] TIMO S, HEIKKI N K, HANNU K. Neural Networks in process fault diagnosis[J]. IEEE Trans. On SMC, 1991,21(4):815-825.
[7] Climente-Alarcon V, Antonino-Daviu J A, RieraGuasp M. Induction motor diagnosis by advanced notch FIR filters and the Wigner-Ville distribution[j]. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2014,61(8): 4217-4227.
[8] Liu W. Analyzing the Degree of Conflict Among Belief Functions[J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2006, 171(11): 909-924.
[9] Jousselem AL, Liu C, Grenier D, et al. Measuring Ambiguity in the Evidence Theory[J]. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics-part A : Systems and Humans, 2006, 36(5):890-903.
[10] Liu P D, Wang Y M. Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators[J]. Applied Soft Computing, 2014, 17(1): 90-104.
[11] Smets P. The combination of evidence in the transferable belief model[J]. IEEE Trans. On Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1990, 12(5): 447-485.
[12]Haenni R. Are alternatives to Dempster’s rule of combination real alternatives Comments on about the belief function combination an the conflict management problem[J]. Information Fusion, 2001, 3(3): 237-239.
[13]Hua Zhongsheng, Gong Bengang, Xu Xiaoyan. ADS-AHPApproach for Multi-attribute Decision Making Problem with Incomplete Information [J]. Expert System withApplication, 2008, 34( 3) : 2221-2227.
[14]Carbajal J C, McLennan A, Tourky R. Truthful implementation and preference aggregation in restricted domains[J]. Journal of Economic Theory, 2013, 148(3): 1074-1101.
[15] Liu P D, Wang Y M. Multiple attribute group decision making methods based on intuitionistic linguistic power generalized aggregation operators[J]. Applied Soft Computing, 2014, 17(1): 90-104.
[16] Xu Z S. Group decision making based on multiple types of linguistic preference relations[J]. Information Sciences, 2008, 178(2): 452-467.
[17] 安春莲,黄静,吴耀云.基于证据理论的多源信息融合模型[J]. 电子信息对抗技术,2017,(01):23-26. doi:10.3969/j.issn. 1674-2230.2017.01.005.
AN Chunlian, HUANG Jing, WU Yaoyun. A Multi-Source Information Fusion Model Based on Evidence Theory[J]. Electronic Information Warfare Technology, 2011, 19(06):133-140. (in Chinese)
[18] Friedman N, Dan G, Goldszmidt M. Bayesian Network Classifiers[J]. Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research & Management Science, 2011 ,29(2-3):598-605.
文章导航

/