ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Propeller Fault Classification for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Explainable Artificial Intelligence-Based Feature-Model Matching.
Article in Sensors (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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spread of unmanned aerial vehicles in daily operations makes the early and reliable diagnosis of propeller faults necessary. However, the performance values reported for such systems are usually obtained with sample level splits, and it is not known which feature representation should be matched with which learner. In this study, a leakage-free feature-model matching framework is presented for propeller fault classification. Microphone and six-axis inertial measurement unit data have been collected on a test bench with 980 kV and 1400 kV motors for one healthy and eight faulty propeller conditions at 16 throttle levels, and 8490 windows of 1 s have been extracted from 1735 measurement files. Four scalar feature sets and three time-frequency representations have been matched with seven ensemble learners and three compact convolutional networks under a file atomic split, and the permutation ranking of the best model has been returned to the feature selection stage. The highest macro-F1 value of 0.8027 and an accuracy of 0.8816 have been obtained with the stacked ensemble trained on the 52 input subset ranked by explainability. It is seen that the time domain statistics and the accelerometer axes are dominant, that three inertial axes reach a macro-F1 of 0.7661, and that cepstral and envelope features stay below the Welch-based features at the sampling rate of 90.9 Hz. The cross-motor experiments have shown that the models depend strongly on the motor class, and the McNemar test has confirmed that the difference between the ensemble branch and the compact convolutional branch is not accidental. In this way, the framework can be used as an evaluation protocol for low-cost multisensor setups on low-level devices.
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.