A novel physical constraint-guided quadratic neural networks for interpretable bearing fault diagnosis under zero-fault sample
Source abstract
Abstract
To increase confidence in intelligent damage assessment models, research often emphasizes interpretability but neglects essential physical fault mechanisms. Addressing this gap, we propose a novel hybrid learning framework combining a dynamic physical model with a data-driven Quadratic Neural Network and Bidirectional LSTM (QNN-Bi-LSTM). Acceleration and velocity equations of the rolling element, derived physically, are embedded as constraints into the loss function, guiding learning. This Physical Constraint-Guided (PCG) learning aligns physical laws with features from real-world vibration data. To enhance generalization under zero fault samples, a genetic algorithm adaptively balances physical and cross-entropy losses. Experiments show the model achieves near 100% accuracy no-load and 95% heavy-load with zero fault samples, exhibiting strong robustness. Compared to conventional models, it significantly enhances interpretability, credibility, and reliability. This highlights a new direction for NDE and condition monitoring, especially for insufficient fault scenarios. Integrating physical principles and nonlinear feature learning offers a promising, generalizable solution for intelligent damage assessment in critical systems like rolling bearings.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Fault Diagnosis Techniques · Gear and Bearing Dynamics Analysis · Fault Detection and Control Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
University of South China
Jiangxi University of Science and Technology
Fujian Makeng Mining Co., Ltd
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China · Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province, China · Scientific Research Fund of Hunan Provincial Education Department
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ress.2023.10979310.1016/j.ress.2023.109793 ↗
2. 10.1080/10589759.2024.240448910.1080/10589759.2024.2404489 ↗
3. Shao H, Lai Y, Liu H, et al. LSFConvformer: A lightweight method for mechanical fault diagnosis under small samples and variable speeds with time-frequency fusion. Mech Sys Sig Proc. 2025;36:113016.10.1016/j.ymssp.2025.113016 ↗
4. 10.1080/10589759.2024.242581310.1080/10589759.2024.2425813 ↗
5. Keshun Y, Guangqi Q, Yingkui G, et al. Remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion batteries using EM-PF-SSA-SVR with gamma stochastic process. Meas Sci Tech. 2023;35(1):015015.10.1088/1361-6501/acfbef ↗
6. 10.1080/10589759.2022.211874710.1080/10589759.2022.2118747 ↗
7. 10.1109/jiot.2024.337773110.1109/jiot.2024.3377731 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.eswa.2025.12859210.1016/j.eswa.2025.128592 ↗
9. Xiao Y, Shao H, Liu B, et al. Evaluating calibration of deep fault diagnostic models under distribution shift. Computers in Industry. 2025;171:104334.10.1016/j.compind.2025.104334 ↗
10. You K, Qiu G, Gu Y. Rolling bearing fault diagnosis using hybrid neural network with principal component analysis. Sensors. 2022;22(22):8906.10.3390/s22228906 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.engappai.2020.10367810.1016/j.engappai.2020.103678 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.measurement.2018.07.04310.1016/j.measurement.2018.07.043 ↗
13. 10.1109/jsen.2023.329667010.1109/jsen.2023.3296670 ↗
14. 10.1088/1361-6501/acd5ef10.1088/1361-6501/acd5ef ↗
15. 10.1016/j.engappai.2023.10703110.1016/j.engappai.2023.107031 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compind.2018.12.01210.1016/j.compind.2018.12.012 ↗
17. 10.1109/JIOT.2023.334074510.1109/JIOT.2023.3340745 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.ress.2023.10914210.1016/j.ress.2023.109142 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.10850210.1016/j.measurement.2020.108502 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.compind.2019.01.00110.1016/j.compind.2019.01.001 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2023.11093610.1016/j.ymssp.2023.110936 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.ress.2024.11000110.1016/j.ress.2024.110001 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.measurement.2022.11122810.1016/j.measurement.2022.111228 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ress.2024.11025210.1016/j.ress.2024.110252 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.neunet.2020.01.00710.1016/j.neunet.2020.01.007 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.engappai.2021.10441510.1016/j.engappai.2021.104415 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.eswa.2021.11619710.1016/j.eswa.2021.116197 ↗
28. 10.1007/s11071-024-10157-110.1007/s11071-024-10157-1 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.neucom.2018.06.07810.1016/j.neucom.2018.06.078 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.ress.2024.11055610.1016/j.ress.2024.110556 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2022.10998010.1016/j.ymssp.2022.109980 ↗
32. 10.1109/TNNLS.2022.321300910.1109/TNNLS.2022.3213009 ↗
33. 10.3390/s2002042010.3390/s20020420 ↗
34. 10.1109/TII.2020.296837010.1109/TII.2020.2968370 ↗
35. 10.1109/tii.2023.324567710.1109/tii.2023.3245677 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.10396710.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2020.103967 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.pnucene.2022.10434410.1016/j.pnucene.2022.104344 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.measurement.2021.11024210.1016/j.measurement.2021.110242 ↗
39. 10.1109/TII.2019.295554010.1109/TII.2019.2955540 ↗
40. 10.3390/s2018511210.3390/s20185112 ↗
41. 10.1109/TIM.2023.332616110.1109/TIM.2023.3326161 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.measurement.2020.10761610.1016/j.measurement.2020.107616 ↗