Metrics for Evaluating Performance of Prognostic Techniques¶
Saxena, A., Celaya, J., Balaban, E., Goebel, K., Saha, S., Saha, S., & Schwabacher, M. (2008). Metrics for Evaluating Performance of Prognostic Techniques. 2008 International Conference on Prognostics and Health Management, 1-17.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Infrastructure Condition Assessment
- A rubric can lag real condition, so hidden internal deterioration hides behind a decent surface rating until it does not; a rating frozen between long assessment intervals goes stale as decay continues unobserved; and the remaining-service-life number carries wide uncertainty that a single tidy figure disguises.
This sourceSaxena and colleagues evaluate remaining-useful-life predictions with explicit accuracy bounds and uncertainty-aware prognostic metrics rather than treating a point estimate as certain.
- A rubric can lag real condition, so hidden internal deterioration hides behind a decent surface rating until it does not; a rating frozen between long assessment intervals goes stale as decay continues unobserved; and the remaining-service-life number carries wide uncertainty that a single tidy figure disguises.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:3851942f40d8 · see in the full table