ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative analysis of deep learning algorithms for rolling element bearing fault classification under variable loads and speeds.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a comparative study of deep learning methods used to classify roller bearing faults. We obtained experimental vibration data by conducting controlled tests on roller bearings with various faults under different load conditions to simulate real-world industrial conditions. The methodology first evaluates four different time-frequency techniques-STFT, CWT, WPT and CQ-NSGT, establishing CQ-NSGT as the superior method for feature visualization. A novel hybrid transfer learning architecture that integrates pre-trained backbones (EfficientNetB0, MobileNetV2, InceptionV3) with custom residual blocks is proposed. These CNNs are compared to a baseline CNN and a Vision Transformer (ViT). Their performance was rigorously evaluated using fivefold cross-validation and tested against additive white Gaussian noise at Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNR) of 1 dB, 3 dB, and 5 dB. The EfficientNetB0 hybrid model was able to reach the highest baseline accuracy of 99.83% while also exhibiting excellent robustness-maintaining 98.8% accuracy even at 1 dB SNR. MobileNetV2 is the most computationally efficient model with a training time of only 121.4 s and 0.50 GFLOPS making it perfect for edge deployment. ViT has potential but is less noise stable and lacks the inductive bias of CNNs which is important for this particular application. These results can be used as a guide for trading off accuracy of diagnosis and computational cost in industrial predictive maintenance.
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.