ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Review and Benchmark Study of Multi-Scale Entropy Methods for the Fault Diagnosis of Rotating Machinery.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Multi-scale entropy is a powerful analytical tool that extends single-scale entropy analysis into a multi-scale feature extraction approach, enabling more reliable fault diagnosis in complex machinery by revealing hidden dynamic information that single-scale metrics neglect. Driven by advances in symbolic dynamics, statistical processing, and robustness enhancement, multi-scale methods have evolved into more than 80 variants. Despite this diversity, a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of these methods is still lacking, particularly with regard to the trade-off between diagnostic accuracy and computational efficiency. This study provides a comprehensive benchmark of 85 multi-scale methods evaluated on the XJTU-Gearbox dataset to establish an evidence-based roadmap that balances diagnostic accuracy and computational cost. Through performance comparison and algorithmic-principle analysis, this study elucidates the mechanisms underlying the performance differences among these variants, highlighting how advanced multi-scale methods preserve richer fault information and enhance feature separability. Furthermore, this work identifies promising development trajectories and offers a basis for future integration of multi-scale methods with deep learning models. To avoid overgeneralization, the results are interpreted as a controlled single-dataset benchmark rather than a universal ranking across all datasets, classifiers, operating conditions, or fault severities.
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.