A comparison study of centralized and decentralized federated learning approaches utilizing the transformer architecture for estimating remaining useful life
Reliability Engineering & System Safety, ISSN: 0951-8320, Vol: 233, Page: 109130
2023
- 39Citations
- 31Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
The current prognostics approaches for a network of assets are centralized and reliant on the availability of assets’ sensors, failures, and anomaly data. To address this, the data from similar assets are usually aggregated to make a richer dataset for prognosis. However, if similar assets are located at different enterprises, business owners may not be willing to share their raw data with each other. One solution is decentralized Federated Learning (FL), where local client data and training is preserved on-site rather than being shared with a central server. Since FL theoretically addresses the challenges faced by the traditional centralized learning approaches, its performance needs to be investigated and compared with the centralized methods. The current paper aims to compare the performance of a centralized model with two decentralized FL algorithms to predict the remaining useful life (RUL) of an asset. Two prediction models, a long short-term memory (LSTM) and the Transformer architecture were developed to predict RUL. The comparison has been conducted using NASA C-MAPSS dataset where the results indicated that FedProx performed better than FedAvg generally, and Transformer architecture performed better overall than LSTM across all datasets in the centralized and decentralized scenarios.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0951832023000455; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109130; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85147329236&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0951832023000455; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109130
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know