skip to main content
10.1145/3522664.3528603acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescainConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

UDAVA: an unsupervised learning pipeline for sensor data validation in manufacturing

Published:17 October 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Manufacturing has enabled the mechanized mass production of the same (or similar) products by replacing craftsmen with assembly lines of machines. The quality of each product in an assembly line greatly hinges on continual observation and error compensation during machining using sensors that measure quantities such as position and torque of a cutting tool and vibrations due to possible imperfections in the cutting tool and raw material. Patterns observed in sensor data from a (near-)optimal production cycle should ideally recur in subsequent production cycles with minimal deviation. Manually labeling and comparing such patterns is an insurmountable task due to the massive amount of streaming data that can be generated from a production process. We present UDAVA, an unsupervised machine learning pipeline that automatically discovers process behavior patterns in sensor data for a reference production cycle. UDAVA performs clustering of reduced dimensionality summary statistics of raw sensor data to enable high-speed clustering of dense time-series data. It deploys the model as a service to verify batch data from subsequent production cycles to detect recurring behavior patterns and quantify deviation from the reference behavior. We have evaluated UDAVA from an AI Engineering perspective using two industrial case studies.

References

  1. Saeed Aghabozorgi, Ali Seyed Shirkhorshidi, and Teh Ying Wah. 2015. Time-series clustering-a decade review. Information Systems 53 (2015), 16--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ali Alqahtani, Mohammed Ali, Xianghua Xie, and Mark W Jones. 2021. Deep Time-Series Clustering: A Review. Electronics 10, 23 (2021), 3001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Saleema Amershi, Andrew Begel, Christian Bird, Robert DeLine, Harald Gall, Ece Kamar, Nachiappan Nagappan, Besmira Nushi, and Thomas Zimmermann. 2019. Software engineering for machine learning: A case study. In 2019 IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP). IEEE, 291--300.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Nagdev Amruthnath and Tarun Gupta. 2018. A research study on unsupervised machine learning algorithms for early fault detection in predictive maintenance. In 2018 5th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA). IEEE, 355--361.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Angelos Angelopoulos, Emmanouel T Michailidis, Nikolaos Nomikos, Panagiotis Trakadas, Antonis Hatziefremidis, Stamatis Voliotis, and Theodore Zahariadis. 2020. Tackling faults in the industry 4.0 era---a survey of machine-learning solutions and key aspects. Sensors 20, 1 (2020), 109.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Moslem Azamfar, Xiang Li, and Jay Lee. 2020. Deep learning-based domain adaptation method for fault diagnosis in semiconductor manufacturing. IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing 33, 3 (2020), 445--453.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Jan Bosch, Helena Holmström Olsson, and Ivica Crnkovic. 2021. Engineering AI systems: A research agenda. In Artificial Intelligence Paradigms for Smart Cyber-Physical Systems. IGI Global, 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. YUE Caixu, GAO Haining, LIU Xianli, Steven Y Liang, and WANG Lihui. 2019. A review of chatter vibration research in milling. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics 32, 2 (2019), 215--242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Chieh-Yu Chen, Shi-Chung Chang, and Da-Yin Liao. 2020. Equipment Anomaly Detection for Semiconductor Manufacturing by Exploiting Unsupervised Learning from Sensory Data. Sensors 20, 19 (2020), 5650.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Yizong Cheng. 1995. Mean shift, mode seeking, and clustering. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PATTERN ANALYSIS AND MACHINE INTELLIGENCE (1995).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Chia-Shang James Chu. 1995. Time series segmentation: A sliding window approach. Information Sciences 85, 1-3 (1995), 147--173.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Code Carbon. [n.d.]. https://codecarbon.io/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. A Del Olmo, G Martínez de Pissón, L Sastoque, A Fernández, A Calleja, and LN López De Lacalle. 2021. Merging complex information in high speed broaching operations in order to obtain a robust machining process. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 1193. IOP Publishing, 012079.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Hui Ding, Goce Trajcevski, Peter Scheuermann, Xiaoyue Wang, and Eamonn Keogh. 2008. Querying and mining of time series data: experimental comparison of representations and distance measures. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 1, 2 (2008), 1542--1552.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Alican Dog6an and Derya Birant. 2021. Machine learning and data mining in manufacturing. Expert Systems with Applications 166 (2021), 114060.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. David H Evans. 1975. Statistical Tolerancing: The State of the Art: Part III. Shifts and Drifts. Journal of Quality Technology 7, 2 (1975), 72--76.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Tak-chung Fu. 2011. A review on time series data mining. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 24, 1 (2011), 164--181.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. K. Fukunaga and L. Hostetler. 1975. The estimation of the gradient of a density function, with applications in pattern recognition. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 21, 1 (1975), 32--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ning Ge, Guanghao Li, Li Zhang, and Yi Liu. 2021. Failure prediction in production line based on federated learning: an empirical study. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing (2021), 1--18.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Great Expectations. [n.d.]. https://greatexpectations.io/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. iterative.ai. [n.d.]. Open-source Version Control System for Machine Learning Projects. https://dvc.org/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. ITP Aero. [n.d.]. https://www.itpaero.com/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Mustafa Kuntoğlu, Emin Salur, Munish Kumar Gupta, Murat Sarıkaya, and Danil Yu Pimenov. 2021. A state-of-the-art review on sensors and signal processing systems in mechanical machining processes. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 116, 9 (2021), 2711--2735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Ruslan Kuprieiev, Dmitry Petrov, Pawel Redzyński, Saugat Pachhai, Casper da Costa-Luis, Alexander Schepanovski, Peter Rowlands, Ivan Shcheklein, Jorge Orpinel, Fábio Santos, Aman Sharma, Zhanibek, Gao, Batuhan Taskaya, Dani Hodovic, Andrew Grigorev, Earl, Nabanita Dash, nik123, George Vyshnya, maykulkarni, Max Hora, Vera, Sanidhya Mangal, Wojciech Baranowski, Clemens Wolff, Alex Maslakov, Alex Khamutov, Kurian Benoy, and Ophir Yoktan. 2021. DVC: Data Version Control - Git for Data & Models. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Hongbin Liu, Mingzhi Huang, Iman Janghorban, Payam Ghorbannezhad, and ChangKyoo Yoo. 2011. Faulty sensor detection, identification and reconstruction of indoor air quality measurements in a subway station. In 2011 11th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems. IEEE, 323--328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Mika Liukkonen and Yrjö Hiltunen. 2018. Recognition of systematic spatial patterns in silicon wafers based on SOM and K-means. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51, 2 (2018), 439--444.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Jon Loeliger and Matthew McCullough. 2012. Version Control with Git: Powerful tools and techniques for collaborative software development. "O'Reilly Media, Inc.".Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. J. Macqueen. 1967. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In In 5-th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. 281--297.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. AB Martins, JT Farinha, and AM Cardoso. 2020. Calibration and Certification of Industrial Sensors---A Global Review. WSEAS Trans. Syst. Control (2020), 394--416.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Benjamin Maschler, Hannes Vietz, Nasser Jazdi, and Michael Weyrich. 2020. Continual learning of fault prediction for turbofan engines using deep learning with elastic weight consolidation. In 2020 25th IEEE international conference on emerging technologies and factory automation (ETFA), Vol. 1. IEEE, 959--966.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Meinard Müller. 2007. Dynamic time warping. Information retrieval for music and motion (2007), 69--84.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2825--2830.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Ioannis Prapas, Behrouz Derakhshan, Alireza Rezaei Mahdiraji, and Volker Markl. 2021. Continuous Training and Deployment of Deep Learning Models. Datenbank-Spektrum 21, 3 (2021), 203--212.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Predict. [n.d.]. https://www.predict.fr/produits-services/logiciels/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Renault Assembly Plant. [n.d.]. https://www.renaultgroup.com/en/our-company/locations/valladolid-bodywork-assembly-plant-2/. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. SAVVY Data Systems. [n.d.]. https://www.savvydatasystems.com/es/inicio. Visited in 2022.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. D. Sculley. 2010. Web-scale k-means clustering. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web - WWW '10. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. David Sculley, Gary Holt, Daniel Golovin, Eugene Davydov, Todd Phillips, Dietmar Ebner, Vinay Chaudhary, Michael Young, Jean-Francois Crespo, and Dan Dennison. 2015. Hidden technical debt in machine learning systems. Advances in neural information processing systems 28 (2015), 2503--2511.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Krishna Kumar Sharma and Ayan Seal. 2021. Outlier-robust multi-view clustering for uncertain data. Knowledge-Based Systems 211 (2021), 106567.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Carla Silva, Marvin F da Silva, Arlete Rodrigues, José Silva, Vítor Santos Costa, Alipio Jorge, and Iněs Dutra. 2021. Predictive Maintenance for Sensor Enhancement in Industry 4.0. In Asian Conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems. Springer, 403--415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Ashish Singhal and Dale E Seborg. 2005. Clustering multivariate time-series data. Journal of Chemometrics: A Journal of the Chemometrics Society 19, 8 (2005), 427--438.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Dimla E Dimla Snr. 2000. Sensor signals for tool-wear monitoring in metal cutting operations---a review of methods. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 40, 8 (2000), 1073--1098.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Hugo Steinhaus et al. 1956. Sur la division des corps materiels en parties. Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci 1, 804 (1956), 801.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Ye Tian, Zili Wang, and Chen Lu. 2019. Self-adaptive bearing fault diagnosis based on permutation entropy and manifold-based dynamic time warping. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 114 (2019), 658--673.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Laurens Van Der Maaten, Eric Postma, Jaap Van den Herik, et al. 2009. Dimensionality reduction: a comparative review. Journal of Machine Learning Research 10, 66--71 (2009), 13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Ethan Wescoat, Matthew Krugh, Andrew Henderson, Josh Goodnough, and Laine Mears. 2019. Vibration analysis utilizing unsupervised learning. Procedia Manufacturing 34 (2019), 876--884.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Michael Wocker, Naomi Kimberly Betz, Christian Feuersanger, Alexander Lindworsky, and Jochen Deuse. 2020. Unsupervised learning for opportunistic maintenance optimization in flexible manufacturing systems. Procedia CIRP 93 (2020), 1025--1030.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Zhengzheng Xing, Jian Pei, and Eamonn Keogh. 2010. A brief survey on sequence classification. ACM Sigkdd Explorations Newsletter 12, 1 (2010), 40--48.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Hamdi Yahyaoui and Aisha Al-Mutairi. 2016. A feature-based trust sequence classification algorithm. Information Sciences 328 (2016), 455--484.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Kaichao You, Mingsheng Long, Zhangjie Cao, Jianmin Wang, and Michael I Jordan. 2019. Universal domain adaptation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2720--2729.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Jiaping Zhao and Laurent Itti. 2018. shapedtw: Shape dynamic time warping. Pattern Recognition 74 (2018), 171--184.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CAIN '22: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on AI Engineering: Software Engineering for AI
    May 2022
    254 pages
    ISBN:9781450392754
    DOI:10.1145/3522664

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 17 October 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader