Asosiy kontentga oʻtish
AkademIndex

Mahsulotlar

Ishlab chiquvchilar uchun

AkademBasetez oradaEkotizim uchun ochiq API
Lotin
Maqola

A Comparative Study of Imbalance-Handling Methods in Multiclass Predictive Maintenance

Mohammed Alnahhal‬‏Mechanical Engineering Department, American University of Ras Al Khaimah, Ras Al Khaimah P.O. Box 10021, United Arab EmiratesMosab I. TabashDepartment of Business Administration, College of Business, Al Ain University, Al Ain P.O. Box 64141, United Arab EmiratesSamir K. SafiDepartment of Statistics and Business Analytics, College of Business and Economics, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain P.O. Box 15551, United Arab EmiratesMujeeb Saif Mohsen Al-AbsyAccounting and Financial Science Department, College of Administrative and Financial Science, Gulf University, Sanad 26489, BahrainZоkir MamadiyarоvDepartment of Economics, Mamun University, Khiva P.O. Box 220900, Uzbekistan
Computationjournal2026en
ABI

Annotatsiya

Predictive maintenance plays a key role in digitalization initiatives; however, in real settings, issues related to failure prediction occur when failure instances are rare compared to normal instances, leading to class imbalance. In this study, we systematically compare five machine learning (ML) models—random forest, XGBoost, support vector machine, k-nearest neighbors, and multinomial logistic regression (MLR)—to detect multiclass rare failures using four imbalance-handling approaches (i.e., no handling, manual oversampling, selective manual oversampling, and class weighting), forming 20 configurations. Using the AI4I 2020 predictive maintenance dataset, which contains five failure types, we determined that XGBoost with no handling achieved the highest macro-averaged F1 (macro-F1) score (0.842) but obtained 0% recall for tool wear failure (TWF). MLR with selective manual oversampling achieved approximately 50% TWF recall with lower overall performance (0.636 macro-F1) than top-performing models such as XGBoost. We also found that very rare classes remain difficult to detect. Even high-performing models fail to consistently detect all five failure types. Overall, no single strategy can achieve a high detection rate across all performance measures.

Mavzular

Identifikatorlar

Iqtiboslar va manbalar

Koʻrsatkichlar — AkademScholar · Tez orada