ArticleHeliyon2025
Prediction of induction motor faults using machine learning.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-accuracy QSPR models for azeotropic property prediction of binary aromatic hydrocarbon mixtures: a genetic function approximation approach.Journal of molecular modeling · 2026Article
- Assessment of a 40-year-old induction motor using hybrid diagnostic and AI-based predictive techniques.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Advancements in Induction Motor Fault Diagnosis and Condition Monitoring: A Comprehensive Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Machine learning based fault classification for improved induction motor performance.PloS one · 2025Article
- Hybrid deep learning framework for real-time fault detection in squirrel-cage induction motors.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unplanned downtime in industrial sectors presents significant challenges, impacting both production efficiency and profitability. To tackle this issue, companies are actively working towards optimizing their operations and reducing disruptions that hinder their ability to meet customer demands and financial goals. Predictive maintenance, utilizing advanced technologies like data analytics, machine learning, and IoT devices, offers real-time equipment data monitoring and analysis. This research study centers on the development of a versatile machine-learning model for predicting faults in induction motors within industrial environments. Implementing such a model can enable proactive maintenance, ultimately leading to decreased downtime in industrial operations. The study involved the acquisition of a dataset comprising healthy and faulty conditions of four 3-phase induction motors, along with relevant features for fault prediction. Multiple machine learning algorithms were trained using this dataset, exhibiting promising performance. The Random Forest (RF) model achieved the highest accuracy at 0.91, closely followed by the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) and k-nearest Neighbors (k-NN) models, both achieving an accuracy of 0.9. Meanwhile, the Decision Tree (DT) model showed the lowest accuracy at 0.89. Further model evaluation was carried out using a confusion matrix, which provided a detailed breakdown of the models' performance for each class, revealing the number of correctly and incorrectly classified induction motor conditions. The results from the confusion matrix indicate that the models effectively classified the various states and conditions of the induction motors. To enhance model performance in future work, potential avenues include refining the ANN and RF models, exploring transfer learning or ensemble methods, and incorporating diverse datasets to improve generalization.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.