Preprocessing for Unintended Conducted Emissions Classification with ResNet
Source abstract
Abstract
Characterization of Unintended Conducted Emissions (UCE) from electronic devices is important when diagnosing electromagnetic interference, performing nonintrusive load monitoring (NILM) of power systems, and monitoring electronic device health, among other applications. Prior work has demonstrated that UCE analysis can serve as a diagnostic tool for energy efficiency investigations and detailed load analysis. While explaining the feature selection of deep networks with certainty is often not fully comprehensive, or in other applications, quite lacking, additional tools/methods for further corroboration and confirmation can help further the understanding of the researcher. This is true especially in the subject application of the study in this paper. Often the focus of such efforts is the selected features themselves, and there is not as much understanding gained about the noise in the collected data. If selected feature and noise characteristics are known, it can be used to further shape the design of the deep network or associated preprocessing. This is additionally difficult when the available data are limited, as in the case which the authors investigated in this study. Here, the authors present a novel work (which is a proposed complementary portion of the overall solution to the deep network classification explainability problem for this application) by applying a systematic progression of preprocessing and a deep neural network (ResNet architecture) to classify UCE data obtained via current transformers. By using a methodical application of preprocessing techniques prior to a deep classifier, hypotheses can be produced concerning what features the deep network deems important relative to what it perceives as noise. For instance, it is hypothesized in this particular study as a result of execution of the proposed method and periodic inspection of the classifier output that the UCE spectral features are relatively close to each other or to the interferers, as systematically reducing the beta parameter of the Kaiser window produced progressively better classification performance, but only to a point, as going below the Beta of eight produced decreased classifier performance, as well as the hypothesis that further spectral feature resolution was not as important to the classifier as rejection of the leakage from a spectrally distant interference. This can be very important in unpredictable low-FNR applications, where knowing the difference between features and noise is difficult. As a side-benefit, much was learned regarding the best preprocessing to use with the selected deep network for the UCE collected from these low power consumer devices obtained via current transformers. Baseline rectangular windowed FFT preprocessing provided a 62% classification increase versus using raw samples. After performing a more optimal preprocessing, more than 90% classification accuracy was achieved across 18 low-power consumer devices for scenarios in which the in-band features-to-noise ratio (FNR) was very poor.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electrostatic Discharge in Electronics · Integrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, USA
Funding
U.S. Department of Energy
References (18)
Show source-provided references
1. Paul, C.R. (2006). Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility, John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/0471758159 ↗
2. Local utility power line communications in the 3–500 kHz band: Channel impairments, noise, and standards10.1109/MSP.2012.2187038 ↗
3. A dimensionally aligned signal projection for classification of unintended radiated emissions10.1109/TEMC.2017.2692962 ↗
4. Nonintrusive appliance load monitoring10.1109/5.192069 ↗
5. Classification of Unintended Radiated Emissions in a Multi-Device Environment10.1109/TSG.2018.2883795 ↗
6. An Empirical Study on Energy Disaggregation via Deep Learning
7. Cooke, C.D., Reed, F.K., Prince, L.J., Vann, J.M., and Anderson, A.L. (2016, January 1–3). An efficient sparse FFT algorithm with application to signal source separation and 2D virtual image feature extraction. Proceedings of the MILCOM 2016-2016 IEEE Military Communications Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA.10.1109/MILCOM.2016.7795359 ↗
8. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., and Sun, J. (2016, January 27–30). Deep residual learning for image recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Cconference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.90 ↗
9. Deep learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
10. Shrikumar, A., Greenside, P., and Kundaje, A. (2017, January 6–11). Learning important features through propagating activation differences. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
11. Sundararajan, M., Taly, A., and Yan, Q. (2017, January 6–11). Axiomatic attribution for deep networks. Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning, Sydney, Australia.
12. Ribeiro, M.T., Singh, S., and Guestrin, C. (2016, January 13–17). “Why should I trust you?”: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA.10.1145/2939672.2939778 ↗
13. Grimes, T., Church, E., Pitts, W., and Wood, L. (2020). Explanation of Unintended Radiated Emission Classification via LIME. arXiv.
14. Over-the-air deep learning based radio signal classification10.1109/JSTSP.2018.2797022 ↗
15. Virtue, P., Stella, X.Y., and Lustig, M. (2017, January 17–20). Better than real: Complex-valued neural nets for MRI fingerprinting. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Beijing, China.10.1109/ICIP.2017.8297024 ↗
16. Data-driven deep learning for automatic modulation recognition in cognitive radios10.1109/TVT.2019.2900460 ↗
17. Schafer, R.W., and Oppenheim, A.V. (1989). Discrete-Time Signal Processing, Prentice Hall.
18. Kay, S. (1999). Modern Spectral Estimation: Theory and Application, Pearson Education.