Adaptive case-based reasoning with probabilistic integration for the diagnosis and prognosis of the technical condition of complex systems

Authors

  • Vychuzhanin V.V. National University “Odesa Polytechnic”, Odessa city
  • Vychuzhanin A.V. National University “Odesa Polytechnic”, Odessa city

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33216/1998-7927-2025-290-4-5-20

Keywords:

probabilistic analysis, Bayesian networks, Markov processes, cognitive models, dynamic adaptation, technical diagnostics, expert systems

Abstract

This study introduces an advanced adaptive Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) framework designed for real-time diagnosis and prognosis of the technical condition of ship power plants, achieved through the seamless integration of Bayesian networks, Markov process modeling, and cognitive simulation within a dynamically adaptive environment. Traditional CBR approaches, while effective at retrieving analogues from historical case archives, often lack the capability to capture complex stochastic dependencies among system components, dynamic degradation patterns under varying operational loads, and real-time contextual variations in sensor data. To address these limitations, the proposed methodology incorporates six integrated phases: data acquisition and normalization, ensuring consistent standardization of heterogeneous sensor readings and operational parameters; probabilistic failure analysis utilizing Bayesian networks to compute conditional failure probabilities and adjust case relevance weights in light of intercomponent dependencies; scenario-driven forecasting based on discrete-time Markov process models to simulate state transition dynamics and predict degradation trajectories; decision adaptation and fusion, which combines classical CBR retrieval outcomes, probabilistic inference results, and forecasted degradation estimates via dynamically normalized weighted coefficients (α, β, γ) that reflect current risk levels; knowledge base maintenance through the incorporation of newly acquired real cases and synthetically generated cases from cognitive simulation, thus enhancing retrieval accuracy and mitigating data scarcity; and automated generation of preventive maintenance recommendations aligned with predicted remaining useful life. Validation experiments conducted on a comprehensive dataset of more than 11 000 historical and synthetic cases demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy of 91 % compared to 79 % achieved by traditional CBR, a 6.7 % reduction in false alarms, a 5–7 % improvement in remaining useful life prediction accuracy, and a 4.7 % decrease in forecast error attributable to the cognitive simulation module, which also improved rare-failure detection rates by 5.1 %. These empirical results confirm the proposed system's high reliability and robustness under fluctuating operational loads and cascading failure scenarios, as well as its seamless integration into onboard monitoring architectures for optimized maintenance scheduling, reduced unplanned downtime, and enhanced operational safety of maritime power plants. 

References

1. Vychuzhanin V., Vychuzhanin A. Stochastic Models and Methods for Diagnostics, Assessment, and Prediction of the Technical Condition of Complex Critical Systems / V. Vychuzhanin, A. Vychuzhanin. Kyiv : Liha Pres, 2025. 360 p. https://doi.org/10.36059/978-966-397-457-6

2. Nikpour H., Aamodt A. Fault Diagnosis under Uncertain Situations within a Bayesian KnowledgeIntensive CBR System / H. Nikpour, A. Aamodt // Progress in Artificial Intelligence. 2021. Vol. 10. Pp. 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13748-020-00227-x

3. Chen M., Xia J., Huang R., Fang W. Case Based Reasoning System for Aeroengine Fault Diagnosis Enhanced with Attitudinal Choquet Integral / M. Chen, J. Xia, R. Huang, W. Fang // Applied Sciences. 2022. Vol. 12, No. 11. Article 5696.

https://doi.org/10.3390/app12115696

4. Schultheis A. Exploring a Hybrid Case Based Reasoning Approach for Time Series Adaptation in Predictive Maintenance / A. Schultheis // ICCBR ’24 Workshop Proceedings. CEUR WS, Vol. 3708, 2024.

5. Schoenborn J. M., Weber R. O., Aha D. W., Cassens J., Althoff K. D. Explainable Case Based Reasoning: A Survey / J. M. Schoenborn, R. O. Weber, D. W. Aha, J. Cassens, K. D. Althoff // AAAI ’21 Workshop Proceedings. CEUR WS, 2021.

6. Kumar R., Schultheis A., Malburg L., Hoffmann M., Bergmann R. Considering InterCase Dependencies during SimilarityBased Retrieval in ProcessOriented Case Based Reasoning / R. Kumar et al. // Proc. 35th FLAIRS Conf. 2022. https://doi.org/10.32473/flairs.v35i. 130680

7. Malburg L., Schultheis A., Bergmann R. Identifying Missing Sensor Values in IoT Time Series Data: A WeightBased Extension of Similarity Measures for Smart Manufacturing / L. Malburg, A. Schultheis, R. Bergmann // Proc. 32nd ICCBR (LNCS 14775). Springer, 2024. Pp. 16–30. – https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-031-63646-2_16

8. Gould A., Paulino Passos G., Dadhania S., Williams M., Toni F. PreferenceBased Abstract Argumentation for Case Based Reasoning (AACBRP) / A. Gould et al. // 21st Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. 2024. Pp. 394–404. https://doi.org/10.24963/kr.2024/37

9. Yan W., Wang J., Lu S., Zhou M., Peng X. A Review of RealTime Fault Diagnosis Methods for Industrial Smart Manufacturing / W. Yan et al. // Processes. 2023. Vol. 11, No. 2. Article 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/ pr11020369

10. Vychuzhanin V., Rudnichenko N., Vychuzhanin A. CBR Method for DecisionMaking Support in Operation Efficiency Ensuring of Complex Technical Systems / V. Vychuzhanin, N. Rudnichenko, A. Vychuzhanin // CEUR WS, Vol. 3702. 2024. Pp. 72–85.

11. Montero Jiménez J. J., Vingerhoeds R., Grabot B. Enhancing Predictive Maintenance Architecture Processes by Using OntologyEnabled Case Based Reasoning / J. J. Montero Jiménez, R. Vingerhoeds, B. Grabot // 2021 IEEE Int. Symp. on Systems Engineering. IEEE, 2021. Pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSE53008. 2021.9574295

12. Ademujimi T., Prabhu V. Fusion Learning of Bayesian Network Models for Fault Diagnostics / T. Ademujimi, V. Prabhu // Sensors. 2021. Vol. 21, No. 22. Article 7633. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21227633

13. Tarcsay B. L., Bárkányi Á., Németh S., Chován T., Lovas L., Egedy A. RiskBased Fault Detection Using Bayesian Networks Based on Failure Mode and Effect Analysis / B. L. Tarcsay et al. // Sensors. 2024. Vol. 24, No. 11. Article 3511. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/s24113511

14. Liao G., Yin H., Chen M., Lin Z. Remaining Useful Life Prediction for MultiPhase Deteriorating Process Based on Wiener Process / G. Liao, H. Yin, M. Chen, Z. Lin // Reliability Engineering & System Safety. 2021. Vol. 207. Article 107361. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ress.2020.107361

15. Sahoo S., Wang H., Blaabjerg F. UncertaintyAware Artificial Intelligence for Gear Fault Diagnosis in Motor Drives / S. Sahoo, H. Wang, F. Blaabjerg // arXiv Preprint arXiv:2412.01272. 2024. https://doi.org/ 10.48550/arXiv.2412.01272

16. Xu J., Wang Q., Zhou J., Zhou H., Chen J. Improved Bayesian Network Based Fault Diagnosis of Air Conditioner Systems / J. Xu et al. // International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering. 2023. Vol. 14. Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1051/ijmqe/2023009

17. Qi B., Zhang L., Liang J., Tong J. Combinatorial Techniques for Fault Diagnosis in Nuclear Power Plants Based on Bayesian Neural Network and Simplified Bayesian Network ANN / B. Qi et al. // Frontiers in Energy Research. 2022. Vol. 10. Article 920194. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.920194

Downloads

Published

2025-05-17