ArticleScientific reports2026
A machine learning-based classification method for SynRM faults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Synchronous reluctance motors (SynRMs) are increasingly critical in industrial and traction applications due to their high efficiency, magnet-free construction, and thermal robustness. However, fault diagnosis frameworks specifically tailored to SynRMs remain scarce, with existing literature predominantly focusing on induction or permanent-magnet machines, isolated fault scenarios, or simulation-only validations. This paper presents a comprehensive multi-fault diagnosis framework that addresses critical gaps in SynRM condition monitoring through rigorous experimental validation and reproducible methodology. Inter-turn short-circuit faults (5% severity, 12/240 turns) and inner-race bearing defects were experimentally induced on a 2.2 kW laboratory SynRM under varying load conditions (no-load, 50%, and 100% rated load), while static/dynamic eccentricity faults were modelled via ANSYS Maxwell FEA and statistically aligned with experimental distributions through noise injection and domain adaptation. Discrete Wavelet Transform (Daubechies 4, 5-level decomposition) was employed to extract time-frequency features from stator currents, yielding a 12-dimensional feature space capturing harmonic signatures from 0 Hz to 5 kHz. Eight machine-learning classifiers were evaluated under standardized protocols: stratified 80/20 train-test splitting (group-based to prevent data leakage), 5-fold cross-validation, and systematic hyperparameter optimization via Grid Search. Results demonstrate that ensemble tree-based methods significantly outperform linear models (McNemar's test, p < 0.05). Random Forest achieved 99.975% accuracy with 100% recall for inter-turn fault detection and 99.975% accuracy with 100% recall for bearing faults, prioritizing zero false negatives essential for protection relaying. For eccentricity classification, AdaBoost and XGBoost attained 100% accuracy with O(NlogN) training complexity, avoiding the prohibitive O(N
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.