See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/363469478

Intelligent Informative Frequency Band Searching Assisted by A Dynamic

Bandit Tree Method for Machine Fault Diagnosis

Article  in  IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics · September 2022

DOI: 10.1109/TMECH.2022.3206435

CITATION READS

1 151

4 authors, including:

Zhenling Mo Zijun Zhang

City University of Hong Kong City University of Hong Kong
21 PUBLICATIONS   412 CITATIONS    113 PUBLICATIONS   4,129 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kwok-Leung Tsui
City University of Hong Kong
326 PUBLICATIONS   13,923 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

General Research Fund: Reliability and Degradation Modeling for Rechargeable Battery View project

Energy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Zhenling Mo on 11 September 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


TMECH-12-2021-12856
Intelligent Informative Frequency Band Searching
Assisted by A Dynamic Bandit Tree Method for
Machine Fault Diagnosis
Zhenling Mo, Zijun Zhang, Senior Member, IEEE, Qiang Miao, Senior Member, IEEE, and
Kwok-Leung Tsui
Abstract—The fault informative frequency band searching is
crucial to envelope analysis-based machine fault diagnosis. Its
success often depends on effective filters. However, existing filters
encounter three problems: 1) fixed filters are not adaptive; 2) the
adaptive decomposition filters are affected by key parameters;
and 3) popular swarm-intelligent filters lack a clear guidance of
parameter settings. This paper innovatively introduces a bandit
optimization algorithm, the dynamic bandit tree (DBT), to help
realize more adaptive filters with the lower parameter-tuning
burden in frequency band searching. Particularly, we show that
boundaries of Meyer wavelet filters can be optimized by the DBT
with effortless parameter tunings. The DBT is constructed by
refining its growth dynamically based on the proposed multi-tree
space partition and reshaped Thompson sampling. Consequently,
the filter boundaries are determined by the optimal trial of the
DBT, enabling better identifications of demodulated fault
frequencies. In verifications, we first benchmark the DBT against
ten optimization algorithms via two multi-dimensional test
functions. We then compare the proposed diagnosis method with
seven existing fault diagnosis methods using bearing and gearbox
fault data. Our methods can excel the benchmarks qualitatively
and quantitatively. Additionally, a Python repository is provided
to facilitate future studies.
Index Terms— Black-box optimization, envelope analysis,
machinery fault diagnosis, multi-armed bandit problem,
Thompson sampling, wavelet filter.
I. INTRODUCTION
B EARING and gear are key components of many rotating
machines. A fault of the key component may lead to severe
malfunctions of the machine system. Thus, studying fault
diagnosis methods for timely discovering the damaged part of
the system is of a great importance [1].
General background. The envelope analysis has been
prevalently applied into machine fault diagnoses [2]. It aims to
observe fault frequencies, i.e., the fundamental fault frequency
(the first harmonic) and the other higher order harmonics
through two essential steps. First, the fault informative
frequency band (FIFB) is searched to provide better
demodulation estimations of fault frequencies. Next, estimated
fault frequencies are compared with theoretical fault
Zhenling Mo, and Zijun Zhang are with the School of Data Science, City
University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR (e-mail:
zijzhang@cityu.edu.hk).
Qiang Miao is with the College of Electrical Engineering, Sichuan
University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Kwok-Leung Tsui is with the Grado Department of Industrial and Systems
Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
1
frequencies to identify fault types [3] [4]. This approach is
feasible since each fault type naturally corresponds to a unique
pattern of theoretical fault frequencies in the demodulation
spectrum. An illustration of bearing fault patterns has been
offered in [5]. In general, a fault type will be diagnosed if two
observations can be obtained in the demodulation spectrum
(e.g., the squared envelope spectrum (SES) [6]). One is that
amplitudes of estimated fault frequencies are salient. Another is
that values of estimated fault frequencies are approximately
equal to theoretical values. More details of the envelope
analysis can refer to two friendly guides [2] and [3].
One challenge in machine fault diagnosis is that the fault
signal is usually obscured by different kinds of noises.
Therefore, it is imperative to apply effective filters to separate
informative components from noises. In terms of the frequency
partition, filters can be generally classified into three groups.
The first group of filters are fixed filters that partition the
original frequency band into bands of fixed widths. Examples
of these filters include the discrete wavelet transform filters [7],
the wavelet packet transform filters [8], the 1/3-bianry tree
filters [9]-[12], etc. The second group of filters are the adaptive
signal decomposition filters [13]. These filters aim at extracting
the intrinsic mode functions adaptively. The popular adaptive
signal decomposition filters applied in the fault diagnosis
include the empirical mode decomposition [14], the variational
mode decomposition (VMD) [15], the empirical wavelet
transform (EWT) [16], etc.. The third group of filters are the
optimization-based filters. These studies generally utilize the
fault index as the objective function and optimize base filters
via an optimization algorithm [17] [18].
Filters in the third group has a significant advantage on
automatically determining filter parameters via optimization
algorithms. Thus, they are less dependent on expert knowledge
in setting sensitive parameters. It is known that the
effectiveness of Meyer wavelet filters of EWT are often
affected by the boundary parameters [16]. In this study, we
propose a novel bandit tree algorithm to adaptively determine
the boundaries of Meyer wavelet filters for machine fault
diagnosis. Two research areas of literature can be related to our
proposal. The first is the research of machine fault diagnosis
concerning the optimization of Meyer wavelet filters. The
second is the study of bandit algorithms for solving the
continuum multi-armed bandit (MAB) problem [19][20]. We
would like to clearly explain major differences between our
proposal and these relevant studies via the following literature
review.

TMECH-12-2021-12856
Related Studies. Regarding works in the first research area,
it can be noted that optimizations of wavelet filters have
frequently appeared in the literature [21][22]. Optimizing
Meyer wavelet filters has been discussed in applications
including the electrocardiogram processing [23], compressed
sensing [24], image restoration [25], etc. In machine fault
diagnoses, studies on optimizing Meyer wavelet filters to
improve feature extractions have also been observed [26]-[28].
However, these studies mainly focus on employing swarm
intelligence algorithms [21]-[28]. Swarm intelligence is
metaheuristic, which may not guarantee solutions of good
qualities. Note that the parameter tunings of metaheuristic
algorithms are also unclear. In addition, a few works [29][30]
have explored leveraging a set of empirically designed rules to
find appropriate boundaries of Meyer wavelet filters. Although
decent performances have been reported, such empirical rules
receive little mathematical support. Moreover, boundary
determinations of Meyer wavelet filters have been studied with
a pre-processing procedure, such as the smoothing or clustering,
in [31]-[33]. Yet, these studies attack the issue from the
preprocessing perspective rather than the optimization of filter
parameters. It is worth noting that bandit tree algorithms are
scarcely studied in the machinery fault diagnosis. Hence, this
work uniquely complements methods for optimizing Meyer
wavelet filters via an innovative extension of the bandit tree
algorithm. Note that tree filters, such as the 1/3-binary tree
filters [9]-[12], are also popular in the machine fault diagnosis.
Although both are tree filters, existing ones are fixed and filters
in this work are dynamically optimized via the proposed bandit
tree algorithm.
Regarding the studies of continuum MAB problems, the
majority of the literature aimed at designing different upper
confidence bounds (UCB) for methods to balance the
exploration and exploitation [19][20][34]-[38]. Several pioneer
works [19][20] have laid down valuable theoretical foundations
for the UCB approaches in early years. Yet, UCB framework
studies are still prevalent in recent years [34]-[38] due to
reasons of two-fold. First, the regret bound analysis can be
often reachable in the UCB frameworks. Next, performances
can be satisfactory if UCBs are appropriately tailored. In
addition to UCB based methods, there are some other works
employing different bandit algorithms, such as the Zipf
sampling [39] and the exponential weight algorithm [40]. Our
work aims at studying continuum MAB algorithms by
developing a different bandit mechanism via integrating the
Thompson sampling process. Interestingly, a latest study [41]
argued that Thompson sampling received little attention in
solving continuum MAB problems. However, not surprisingly,
applications of Thompson sampling can be found in other
settings, such as combinatorial bandit problems [42],
contextual bandit problems [43], discreate decision trees [44],
and Gaussian process-based Bayesian optimizations [45].
Compared with existing Thompson sampling-based literature,
our work aims at equipping the multi-tree space partition with
the reshaped Thompson sampling under continuum MAB
setting. Moreover, our work aims at the machine fault diagnosis
which differs from existing studies from the application aspect.
2
Motivations. This work is motivated by following
observations. First, fixed filters [7]-[12] are not flexible and
adaptive, even though they are prevalent. Secondly, adaptive
signal decomposition filters [14]-[16] are often affected by
their sensitive parameters. Thirdly, current optimization-based
filters are popularly optimized by swarm-intelligent algorithms
[21]-[28]. Yet, the guidance of determining hyper-parameters
of swarm intelligence methods is unclear. Finally, studying
bandit algorithms is rare in terms of searching fault informative
frequency bands for machine fault diagnosis. Therefore, we are
motivated to develop a bandit tree algorithm assisted method
for the machine fault diagnosis, which can make improvements
in problem-solving.
Main contributions. This paper majorly makes following
contributions:
1) A novel optimization algorithm, the dynamic bandit tree
(DBT), is proposed. The novelty of this algorithm is of two
folds. First, the Thompson sampling is integrated into
continuum MAB settings, which differs from most existing
continuum MAB algorithms. Secondly, we propose
leveraging the multi-tree continuum space partition and
reshaping the posterior of the standard Thompson
sampling, which differs from the past Thompson sampling
literature. In addition, the storage and time complexities of
the DBT are analyzed.
2) A novel adaptive fault diagnosis method, the dynamic
bandit tree search (DBTS), is next developed. This method
is new and significant from following perspectives. First,
the Meyer wavelet filters are optimized by the proposed
DBT algorithm for searching FIFB. To the best of our
knowledge, bandit algorithms are rarely studied for
searching FIFB. Secondly, the DBT can outperform both
well-known and newly proposed optimization algorithms
belonging to the kind prevalently used in machine fault
diagnosis. Thirdly, the DBTS diagnosis method is shown
to be effective and effortless in setting parameters by
benchmarking with previously related diagnosis methods.
3) A Python repository is developed and offered to facilitate
future research. It provides DBT and UCB frameworks to
enable future studies of bandit algorithms in machine fault
diagnosis. In addition, popular filters and various fault
indexes are included to encourage more studies of the
envelope analysis-based fault diagnosis. The repository is
at https://github.com/mozhenling/dbtree.
The subsequent parts are organized as follows. Section II
introduces the preliminaries of the MAB problem and Meyer
wavelet filters. Section III provides the details of the proposed
MAB modeling for machine fault diagnosis. Section IV offers
the benchmark studies. Finally, section V summarizes the
paper.
II. PRELIMINARIES
This section offers some basics of the MAB problem, the
Thompson sampling, and the Meyer wavelet filters of EWT.
A. Multi-Armed Bandit Problem
In this part, we summarize the key ideas of the MAB
 3
TMECH-12-2021-12856
B. Meyer Wavelet Filters
The base filters considered in this paper are the Meyer
wavelet filters of EWT [16] shown in Fig. 1. Definitions of the
scaling function  n ( ) and the wavelet function  n ( ) are
provided as follows.
1,   1

  1
Fig. 1 The triple Meyer wavelet filter bank  n    cos[  ( (   bn   n ))],    2 (4)
 2 2
problem and the standard Thompson sampling from [46]-[48]. n

More theoretical backgrounds can refer to [46]-[48]. First, the 0, othersiwe
standard stochastic MAB problem can be illustrated as follows   1
[46]. Let i  [ K ]  {1, 2,..., K } be the bandit index and sin[ 2  ( 2 (   bn   n ))],    2
t  1, 2,..., T be the time step. Essential components of the  n

1,    3
MAB include: 1) the K-armed bandits A  {ai }i 1,..., K , 2) the  n     (5)
cos[   ( 1 (   b   ))],   
corresponding unknown reward distributions V  { i }i 1,..., K , 3)  2 2 n 1
n 1 n 1 4


the strategy  describing the selected arms S ={ait }it[1,2,...,
K]
T
, and 0, othersiwe
4) the received rewards R  {rit }ti[1,2,...,
K]
T
, where rit is drawn where 1 ,  2 , 3 , and  4 are feasible sets defined by the
from  i and associated with the observation ot when playing mode boundaries bn and bn 1 as well as the half widths of the
ai at time t . Let i be the average reward of playing the arm transition areas  n and  n 1 .    is a special function with
of the i -th bandit. The goal of this study is to find the optimal domain in [0,1] . More details can be obtained in [16].
bandit ai with its index defined by i   arg max i{1,2,..., K } i .
III. DYNAMIC BANDIT TREE METHOD
Note that bandit arms are continuous in the continuum MAB
problems. Therefore, a space partition and zooming selection of This section describes the MAB assisted FIFB search
arms are required in the continuum settings [19][20]. method in machine fault diagnosis.
Typical bandit algorithms, such as the Thompson sampling A. Bernoulli Bandit Model
method, can be used as the strategy to balance the exploration
and exploitation [47]. Let o t be generated according to the
Let  b1 , b2  denote a bandit pair of boundaries. Let

conditional probability measure q  |ait  parametrized by the FI  b1 , b2  be the reward function of the Bernoulli bandit
model, which is computed based on the signal of the frequency
unknown parameter vector  in the parameter space  . Let
band [b1 , b2 ] . Note that the reward function FI   is often a
r t be defined by the reward function f r  ot  . Then, the
black box, which means that only the input  b1 , b2  and the
expected reward conditional on ait is given as follows.
output FI  b1 , b2  are observable. However, we assume that
 q ˆ  f r  ot  ait  =  f r  ot  qˆ  ot | ait  do t (1)
  FI   is Lipschitz continuous. Then, a surrogate reward model,
where  is the observation space and ˆ is the sample of  . i.e., the Bernoulli bandit model, can be developed via
ˆ can be drawn according to the distribution p t   . p 0  is Algorithm I. The Bernoulli bandit model is responsible for
the initial prior imposed. pt   can be updated based on the informing the optimization algorithm about the success or
failure of obtaining a better candidate solution. Note that the
Bayes rule as follows. Bernoulli bandit model development in Algorithm I can be
 q  o | a ,   p  d 
t t t 1
i trivially extended to a minimization problem with the input
p t
   
(2)
B t   b1t , b2t ,..., bnt  . In addition, the threshold update can be
 q  o | a ,   p  d 
t t t 1
 i
generalized as follows.
Finally, the selected arm ast at time t via the Thompson
 t  1   ( B t )   t 1   ( B t ) FI ( Bt ) (6)
sampling is given next.
ast  arg max ai  A  q ˆ  f r  ot  ai  where the balancing function is defined as  () : R  [0,1] . n
(3)

The balancing function can be potentially leveraged to control
The regret analysis of Thompson sampling for the standard
stochastic bandit problem has been given in [48], which the exploration and the exploitation if the smoothness of FI  
provides the theoretical guarantee for the performance. The is given. If FI   is a black box, we may set  ( B t )=1/2 . The
specific form of the proposed reshaped Thompson sampling new threshold takes only half from the new value and the other
will be detailed later. half from the old value. The iterative update of (6) can be then
 4
TMECH-12-2021-12856

Algorithm I Bernoulli Bandit Model for Maximizing the Fault Index

b , b 
t 1,2,...,T
t t
1. Input 1 2 # Bandit pair sequence

2. Output I r 
t t 1,2,...,T
B # Bernoulli reward sequence

3. Output II robj 
t t 1,2,...,T
# Objective reward sequence
4. Initialize r   ,  =FI  b , b20  , where  b10 , b20   uniform 0,  
0
obj
0 0
1

5. t  1
6. While t  T do:
7. t
robj 
= max FI  b1t , b2t  , robj
t -1
 # Update objective reward

If FI  b1t , b2t    t 1 :
Fig. 2 Multi-tree space partition
8. # Comparison with the threshold
9. rBt  1 # Success of Bernoulli trial, reward = 1
1 1
10.  t =  t -1 + FI  b1t , b2t  # Update the threshold
2 2
11. Else:
12. rBt  0 # Failure of Bernoulli trial, reward = 0
13.  t = t -1 # Keep the threshold
14. t  t  1 # Next iteration
15. End

approximatively regarded as a sum of a geometric progression

with a ratio 1 / 2 after sufficient iterations of the optimization.
Thus, the sum will be equal to a sub-optimal value and Fig. 3 Tree growth
gradually pushes the search trajectory towards the optimal where Cij is the j -th cell at level i and f s is the sampling
value. frequency. At each iteration, we generate a sample uniformly at
Essentially, the Bernoulli bandit model is employed to random from Cij if it has been selected by our policy. Let
generate the surrogate reward for each trial of  b1 , b2  . It also
CijTree k be the cell from tree k . A sample of the bandit pair
establishes a Bernoulli reward distribution for the bandit pair.
The probability of the successful Bernoulli trial is  b , b  is obtained as follows.
t
1
t
2


p t  P FI  b1t , b2t    t 1  b1t , b2t  ,  t 1  . As FI   is a black bkt  uniform  CijTree k ， k = 1,2 (9)

box, assuming a correct prior may be difficult. By using the
Bernoulli bandit model, we avoid making assumptions on the
distribution of the objective reward.
B. Multi-tree Space Partition
Taking one variable of the bandit pair as an example, the
number of armed-bandits N arm is defined next.
N sig
fs
N arm 
(7)
2 2
where  denotes the frequency resolution, f s represents the
sampling frequency, and N sig is the discrete signal length. Thus,
the maximum depth of the binary tree can be set as log 2 N arm .
However, we may not need to always locate the FIFB precisely
at the finest frequency resolution due to similarities shared by
adjacent arms. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to start
with a rough resolution and gradually zoom in, which is shown
in Fig. 2. The input space of  b1 , b2  can be partitioned
simultaneously along each dimension using a tree. For a
dimension with the range [0, f s / 2] , we can define several
equal length cells to meet following condition.
[0, f s / 2]=U j =1 Cij
After  b1t , b2t  is generated, it can be fed into the Bernoulli
bandit model. Then, we can obtain the Bernoulli reward to
update the posterior distribution in the Thompson sampling.
C. Dynamic Bandit Tree
1) Tree Growth
Taking tree 1 in Fig. 2 as an example, the proposed tree
growth follows the similar procedure of the Monte Carlo tree
 search [49], which includes four steps as shown in Fig. 3.
Suppose we start from the very beginning, namely the root
node C01. The first step is to expand the children, which are
C11 and C12. In the second step, we select one of them
according to the posterior mean of the nodes. For instance, C11
is selected if its posterior mean is larger than that of C12. In the
third step, we can then generate b1t based on (9) with k  1 . As
the trees of DBT proceed concurrently, we also have b2t being
generated similarly. The sample  b1t , b2t  is then fed into the
Bernoulli bandit model to produce the Bernoulli reward. In the
last step, the reward information is passed to all nodes in the
same path connecting the root node. The corresponding
posteriors are then updated. The next iteration also starts from
2i the root node. Since the root node already has child nodes, the
(8)
expansion step is skipped. In the selection step, if C12 is
selected, the simulation and the backpropagation steps will
 5
TMECH-12-2021-12856
continue. However, if C11 is selected, as it has been gone bit  biO
through the simulation step, C11 will be expanded to the next biU  biL
level. Finally, the selection, simulation, and backpropagation D  bit , biO  =d  (14)
bit  biO

d
steps will be repeated once. After many iterations, the tree will i 1 biU  biL
grow into a deeper level and the location of FIFB can be more
precise. where D   is the reshaping function, bit is the current
One difference between the DBT and the Monte Carlo tree boundary generated by the i -th tree, biO is the most recent
search is that the former is a multi-tree method, and the latter is
usually a single tree method. Another distinct difference is that optimal boundary, biU is the upper bound, biL is the lower
the Monte Carlo tree search is based on the UCB to balance the bound, and d is the number of dimensions.
exploration and exploitation, which is a deterministic method. The core idea of Thompson sampling is to choose the arm
It usually requires choosing an appropriate formulation of the with the largest posterior mean, while the posterior variance
UCB for a specific problem. Thus, it is not easy to generalize. maintains the uncertainty. The posterior mean and variance are
The DBT is a probabilistic method as the Thompson sampling given in (15) and (16), respectively.
is utilized. The DBT only makes the continuity assumption on  it 1
the objective reward and uses the Bernoulli reward as the 
E pit 1 rBt , bit , biO     it 1
t 1
i
(15)
surrogate.
 it 1  it 1
2) Reshaped Thompson Sampling
 
Var pit 1 rBt , bit , biO  (16)
The reshaped Thompson sampling is mainly proposed to
   it 1   it 1   it 1 +1
t 1 2
i
select the cell in step 2 as shown in Fig. 2. We start with the
standard one and then introduce the reshaped counterpart. Finally, some observations of the reshaped Thompson
The probability density function of the Bernoulli bandit sampling can be made as follows: 1) If the Bernoulli trail is
model is f  r p   p r 1  p 
1 r
, where r is the Bernoulli successful, the weight will be given to  it 1 since rBt  1 .

reward and p is the probability of the successful Bernoulli trial.
Then, we can choose the conjugate prior, i.e., the Beta prior for
parameter p as follows.
G    
f  p  p 1 1  p 
 1
G   G   
where G   is the gamma function while  and  are two
parameters of the Beta distribution denoted as Beta  ,   .
The  =1 and  =1 is applied at t  0 , which imposes a
uniform prior. After receiving a Bernoulli reward rBt , the
posterior can be updated proportionally as follows according to
the Bayes rule.
 
f p rBt  Beta   rBt ,   1  rBt 
Therefore, the posterior is obtained simply by adding the
reward to the parameter of the prior. If the Bernoulli trial is
successful, we just add rBt =1 to  while  remains the same.
Otherwise, we add 1  rBt  1  0  1 to  and  remains
unchanged.
However, the standard posterior update may not be suitable
for multiple trees coordinated to optimize one objective
function. The reason is that all posteriors will be updated by the
same amounts of rewards regardless of the sample change
along each dimension. To increase connections of each tree, we
propose to reshape the posterior by changing the parameters as
Hence, if the sample bit moves more towards the current
optimal, it obtains a higher weight from (14). As the posterior
mean becomes higher, the probability of selecting the cell
generating bit will be higher. 2) Conversely, if the Bernoulli
(10) trial is unsuccessful, the weight will be added to  it 1 . The
probability of selecting the corresponding cell will decrease. 3)
t
If all the samples {bi }i 1,2,...d change by the same degree, the
reshaping function will be equal to 1, which returns to the
standard update defined in (11). 4) As  it 1 or  it 1 increases,
the variance decreases. Thus, we will be more and more certain
about the probability of the Bernoulli trial.
Finally, each tree of DBT follows steps shown in Fig. 3 to
proceed, where the reshaped Thompson sampling is taken place
(11)
in step 2 and step 4. Namely, it selects the cell according to the
posterior mean in the selection step and updates the posterior in
the backpropagation step. The proposed DBT can be easily
utilized to optimize unconstraint continuous optimization
problems. With certain modifications, it can also be potentially
applicable to other kinds of optimization problems.
D. Dynamic Bandit Tree Search for Fault Diagnosis
The proposed dynamic bandit tree search based fault
diagnosis method (DBTS) is shown in Fig. 4, which can be
formulated as an unconstraint problem as follows.
arg max FI obj  b1 , b2  (17)
b1 , b2

follows.  FI max  b1 , b2  , if b2 -b1  Bmin


 it +1   it  rBt  D  bit , biO  FI obj  b1 , b2    (18)
 
(12)
 FI max b1 , b2 ，otherwise
 it 1  it  (1  rBt )  D  bit , biO  (13)
FI max (b1 , b2 )  max C (0, b1 ), C (b1 , b2 ), C (b2 , f s / 2) (19)
 6
TMECH-12-2021-12856

Fig. 5 Three dimensional contours of the test functions (two dimensional

variable cases); (a) Rastrigin function; (b) Schwefel function.
to infer the boundaries of Meyer wavelet filters using CHNR as
the fault index. This part includes the tree growth in Fig. 3,
while the tree growth includes the bandit algorithm in
Algorithm I. In part III, the optimal band signal is
demodulated into SES. We then observe the estimated fault
frequencies to identify specific fault types.

IV. CASE STUDIES

In case studies, we first verify the effectiveness of the
Fig. 4 Flow chart of the dynamic bandit tree search for machine fault diagnosis;
(a) Time signal; (b) Signal spectrum; (c) Dynamic bandit tree-based filtering; developed DBT via well-known test functions. Next, we verify
(d) Tree 1 for optimizing boundary b1; (e) Tree 2 for optimizing boundary b2; the effectiveness of the DBTS via bearing fault data and
(f) Squared envelope spectrum. Estimated fault harmonics are marked by red gearbox fault data.
circles and the theoretical ones are marked by dashed lines.
where b1   Bmin , f s / 2  2 Bmin  , b2   2 Bmin , f s / 2  Bmin  , A. Benchmarks via Test Functions
1) Preparations
b  b  Bmin
b1 =min b1 , b2  , b2 =max b1 , b2  , b1 = 1 2 , First, it is important to verify the DBT optimization
2 algorithm. We conduct simulation experiments based on the
b  b  Bmin
b2 = 1 2 , FI obj  is the final objective function, Rastrigin function and Schwefel function. They are selected by
2 two main reasons. First, they are computationally cheap so that
and FI max   is a maximization function. Bmin is the minimum massive tests are allowed. Secondly, they have many local
minima, which can be analogous to many cases in optimization
bandwidth required for calculating the fault index. f s is the problems of mechanics. The 3-dimentional contours are shown
sampling frequency, which corresponds to 2 in angular in Fig. 5 and the corresponding specifications are available in
domain. C  l , h  is the cyclic harmonic to noise ratio (CHNR) [51].
In the experiment, we decompose our ideas of establishing
of the signal having frequency band [l , h] . We reformulate the
the proposed optimization algorithm and obtain three versions
fault index, i.e., the CHNR from [50], as follows. of DBT, the DBT1, DBT2, and DBT3. Basically, DBT1 is
1 M  (i )]
SES [ l , h ] [ Har based on the single-tree space partition and the standard
CHNR  l , h     (i )]+ N SES [ l , h ] [ Lmax( n )]
(20) Thompson sampling. DBT2 is based on the multi-tree space
M i 1 SES [ l , h ] [ Har  n Har (i) partition and the standard Thompson sampling. DBT3 is based
where l and h denote two frequency bounds of the filter, M is on multi-tree space partition and the reshaped Thompson
the number of fault frequency harmonics and we consider the sampling. In short, DBT1 and DBT2 differ in space partitions,
first three harmonics in this paper, SES is the squared envelope while DBT2 and DBT3 differ in the Thompson samplings.
spectrum [50], Har · (i ) is the i-th estimated harmonic, DBT3 is the final version and adopted as part of the proposed
diagnosis method in the next sub-section. We also compare the
and Lmax(n) is the surrounding local maximum of Har · (i ) . three DBTs with other commonly seen algorithms including the
Intuitively, the CHNR defined in (20) measures the averaged Monte Carlo tree search (MCT) [49], the genetic algorithm
prominence of fault frequencies relative to the local maxima. (GA), the particle swarm optimization algorithm (PSOA), the
After the formulation, the optimization problem can be solved grasshopper optimization algorithm (GOA), and the whale
by replacing FI   with FI obj   in Algorithm I and then optimization algorithm (WOA). The classic swarm-intelligent
methods (GA, PSOA, GOA, and WOA) are provided in
implementing the DBT. Mealpy (v1.1.0) [52]. In addition, three newly proposed
As shown in Fig. 4, the proposed DBTS can be divided into algorithms are also compared. They are the gradient based
three parts as follows. In part I, the signal, such as the vibration optimizer (GBO) [53], Archimedes optimization algorithm
signal, is collected. It is then detrended and transformed into the (AOA) [54], and battle royale optimization algorithm (BROA)
Fourier frequency domain. In part II, the DBT is implemented [55].
 7
TMECH-12-2021-12856
TABLE I
THE MINIMIZATION RESULTS OF TEST FUNCTIONS
Results on Different Dimensions of Rastrigin function Results on Different Dimensions of Schwefel function
Algorithm
Two Dimensions Four Dimensions Six Dimensions Two Dimensions Four Dimensions Six Dimensions
MCTS [49] 4.49±4.06 12.99+6.66 30.92±8.50 291.59±141.18 704.94±251.21 1163.49±275.60
GA [52] 0.89±0.72 4.25±2.32 11.39±4.47 116.59±70.14 614.58±149.75 1263.78±276.26
PSOA [52] 1.83±1.12 12.04±4.05 29.69±7.25 13.20±19.79 257.87±113.00 779.12±190.63
GOA [52] 3.11±2.72 12.64±8.53 27.03±9.39 165.21±113.82 555.63±216.26 915.77±265.81
WOA [52] 0.47±0.76 5.22±6.59 17.15±12.41 94.32±81.11 450.36±174.37 737.45±260.33
GBO [53] 0.14±0.33 4.17±3.77 8.90±7.36 54.85±56.73 408.25±175.49 814.35±222.97
AOA [54] 0.23±0.63 1.94±3.05 3.48+6.61 223.27±103.68 734.78±158.42 1109.53±435.67
BROA [55] 1.95±1.43 17.42±6.87 37.19+11.13 14.30±25.08 363.68±180.26 885.66±265.45
DBT1(variant) 0.77±0.49 13.34±2.85 35.911±6.50 27.70±50.09 386.09±113.88 1052.09±129.00
DBT2 (variant) 0.08±0.25 4.32±2.63 16.66±5.97 1.61±8.56 67.05±74.69 314.23±138.50
DBT3 (Ours) 0.03±0.18 1.33±1.40 3.35±1.79 0.00±0.02 31.64±60.63 93.89±111.36
Minimization results are expressed as mean±standard deviation. GA: genetic algorithm. PSOA: particle swarm optimization algorithm. GOA: grasshopper
optimization algorithm. WOA: whale optimization algorithm. GBO: Gradient-Based Optimizer. AOA: Archimedes optimization algorithm. BROA: battle royale
optimization algorithm. MCTS: Monte Carlo tree search. DBT1: dynamic bandit tree with single tree space partition and standard Thomson sampling. DBT2:
dynamic bandit tree with multi-tree space partition and standard Thomson sampling. DBT3 (Ours): dynamic bandit tree with multi-tree space partition and reshaped
Thomson sampling.
We formulate the optimization problems as minimization
problems. We allow each optimization algorithm to query the
objective function for 1000 times. To reduce the randomness
effect, we repeat each test of each algorithm for 30 times. The
evaluation metrics are the average optimal value and the
standard deviation obtained by the algorithm. Near-zero values
of the metrics indicate good performances of the algorithms.
By convention, we set the tree type as a binary tree for a
tree-based algorithm. The tree depth is set to 15 by considering
the desired resolution. In a tree-algorithm, one epoch of
optimization only calls the objective once. Thus, the total
number of epochs is 1000 according to the limit considered. Fig. 6 Bearing test rig
Generally, we only need to set the tree-depth of our method,
which is effortless since the tree-depth is set by the desired
resolution. As for a swarm-based algorithm, we consider
setting the swarm size as 20 and the number of iterations as 50,
which corresponds to 1000 times of querying the objective
function. Other parameters remain the same as suggested in the
previous study [52]-[55].
2) Performance Analyses on Solving Test Functions
Test results are reported in TABLE I. We can see that
performances of DBT2 are better than those of DBT1, while
Fig. 7 Gearbox test rig
performances of DBT3 are better than those of DBT2.
Therefore, our proposed multi-tree space partition and the other important parameters besides the swarm size and the
reshaped Thompson sampling are validated. In other words, number of iterations. Once the objective function evaluation
these two techniques can improve the bandit tree search becomes relatively expensive in computation, it is common to
performances. In addition, we can also observe that results of limit the number of times of executing the objective function.
DBT1 are better than those of MCT in most cases. DBT1 and Given a fixed number of accessing the objective function,
MCT only differ in tree-node selection methods. DBT1 uses the balancing the swarm-size and the number of iterations may be
standard Thompson sampling, while MCT uses the upper also difficult. However, such problem does not exist in DBT3
confidence bound. MCT can be powerful if an appropriate due to its principle. In general, as shown in TABLE I, DBT3 is
upper confidence bound is formulated. However, the correct better than other benchmarks in finding the optimal value in the
upper confidence bound is usually case-specific. For a new case, experiment. Next, it is integrated into the proposed diagnosis
we may need to spend a lot of efforts on finding more suitable method and the resulted algorithm is DBTS. The DBT3 is
parameters. Different from the upper confidence bound method, named as the DBT in the following for simplicity.
the Thompson sampling is a Bayesian probabilistic method, B. Benchmarks via Fault Data
which only concerns the prior distribution selection. Even In this sub-section, bearing fault and gearbox fault data are
though the prior may differ from the true distribution at the
used. The proposed DBTS is first compared with the kurtogram
beginning, the posterior can gradually approximate the true [9], the infogram [10], the optimized VMD (OVMD) [56]
distribution once more observations are obtained. Swarm-based
methods in the qualitative analysis. The clearness of the fault
algorithms may also suffer from the requirements of tuning

TMECH-12-2021-12856
Fig. 8 Bearing diagnosis fault results by different methods; (a)-(d) The FIFB identifications by the kurtogram, the infogram, the OVMD, and the DBTS,
respectively; (e)-(h) The SESs of the kurtogram, the infogram, the OVMD, and the DBTS, respectively. The FIFBs are indicated by red arrows. The theoretical
fault harmonics are marked by the vertical red lines. The estimated fault harmonics are marked by red circles.
frequencies in SES (the demodulation spectrum) is used to
compare and validate each method per the norm of the envelope
analysis framework [2][3]. Next, four recently proposed
methods, the Hoyergram [12], Gini-index II and Gini-index III
methods [17], and the optimized EWT (OEWT) [26] are
additionally considered to provide the quantitative analysis as
part of the further discussions. The clearness of fault
frequencies will be quantified by three different metrics
detailed later. Regarding the key parameters, the minimum
bandwidths for all methods are at least larger than three times of
the fault frequency. The number of times of querying the
objective function is 500 for optimization methods. OEWT and
OVMD both adopt 20 particles and 25 iterations. Other
parameters remain the same as the previous studies [26] [56].
The maximum tree depth of DBT is log 2 N arm according to (7).
1) Bearing Data
The test rig for collecting the bearing data is shown in Fig. 6.
A rolling element fault was introduced by the wire-electrode
cutting on the test bearing. The specifications of the faulty
bearing are also listed in the figure. According to [3], the fault
frequency of rolling element can be calculated as 80.9 Hz. The
data was collected by an accelerometer (PCB621B40) and an
acquisition unit. The sampling frequency was 10 kHz and a
total of 20 k points were used.
2) Gearbox data
The test rig for acquiring the gearbox data is shown in Fig. 7.
The gearbox is a planetary gearbox. A tooth crack was applied
to the ring gear. Other information of the gearbox is also shown
in the figure. According to [4], the fault frequency of ring gear
can be obtained as 3.8 Hz. The data was collected by an
accelerometer (PCB604B31) and an acquisition unit. The
sampling frequency was 5 kHz and 50 k points were used for
the analysis.
3) Bearing Fault Result Analysis
Diagnosis results of the bearing fault by different methods
are offered in Fig. 8. As seen in Fig. 8 (a)-(d), the FIFBs given
by the benchmark methods are all located in the low frequency
areas. The corresponding SESs are shown in Fig. 8 (e)-(h). The
SESs of the kurtogram and the infogram are the same since they
locate the same FIFBs. The SES of the OVMD is similar to
those of the kutrogram and infogram. However, the fault
frequency harmonics are more clearly observable. Although
side frequencies are also typical patterns of the rolling element
8
fault, the diagnosis result is not favorable if the side frequencies
already mask the main patterns, i.e., the fault frequency
harmonics. As compared to other SESs, the fault frequency
harmonics are more clearly recognizable in the one provided by
the proposed DBTS. Therefore, the diagnosis result of the
proposed method is better. The potential reasons for the
phenomenon are as follows. Compared to the OVMD, the
frequency support of the FIFB given by the DBTS is more
compact, which can be seen by comparing Fig. 8 (c) and (d).
Since filters used by the kutogram and the infogram do not
follow the orthogonal design, they may suffer from mode
mixing problems. In addition, the 1/3-binary tree is static,
leading to fixed partitions of the spectrum. As DBTS is
dynamic, it may be more flexible in terms of filtering. Finally,
we can conclude that the effectiveness of DBTS is validated
based on the analysis.
4) Gearbox Fault Result Analysis
The gearbox fault may be more difficult to diagnose than the
bearing fault since there are multiple impulse sources. Some
impulses, such as those ignited by gear meshing, are commonly
seen even if there is no fault. The diagnosis results of different
methods are shown in Fig. 9. From Fig. 9 (a)-(d), we observe
that different methods locate different FIFBs. The
corresponding SESs are shown in Fig. 9 (e)-(h), respectively. It
is seen that the fault frequency harmonics in the SES of the
proposed method are more prominent than those in other SESs.
Thus, the diagnosis of the DBTS is more effective. As for the
OVMD, the FIFB is not correct. There may be two possible
reasons for this: 1) the fault indexes may not be highly suitable
for evaluating the fault in this case; 2) it is hard to set
parameters of swarm algorithms. However, with a limited
number of querying the objective function, there is no clear
guidance in the literature for setting the particle size and the
number of iterations. As a rule of thumb, the particle size
should be smaller than the iteration number. However, it should
not be too small. As mentioned earlier, we have set the particle
size as 20 and the iteration number as 25, leading to the same
number of queries as the proposed method. In addition, for a
large number of iterations, it can be computationally expensive.
Regarding the kurtogram and the infogram, the FIFB of the
former is over-decomposed and the FIFB of the latter is
under-decomposed. Therefore, the fault frequency harmonics
are not clearly observable in the corresponding SESs. Finally,
 9
TMECH-12-2021-12856

Fig. 9 Gear fault diagnosis results by different methods; (a)-(d) The FIFB identifications by the kurtogram, the infogram, the OVMD, and the DBTS, respectively;
(e)-(h) The SESs of the kurtogram, the infogram, the OVMD, and the DBTS, respectively. The FIFBs are indicated by red arrows. The theoretical fault harmonics
are marked by the vertical red lines. The estimated fault harmonics are marked by red circles. The SESs have been zoomed in.
TABLE II
QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE NORMALIZED SQUARED ENVELOPE SPECTRUM
Different Metrics Based on Bearing Fault Data Different Metrics Based on Gearbox Fault Data
Method
Vanilla SNR (db) Mean Amplitude Harmonic Kurtosis Vanilla SNR (db) Mean Amplitude Harmonic kurtosis
Kurtogram [9] -18.19 0.28 3.68 -14.49 0.25 1.10
Infogram [10] -18.19 0.28 3.68 -6.85 0.48 6.31
Hoyergram [12] -18.19 0.28 3.68 -6.86 0.19 0.07
Gini-index II [17] -18.19 0.28 3.68 -6.86 0.19 0.07
Gini-index III [17] -18.19 0.28 3.68 -6.86 0.19 0.07
OEWT [26] -15.01 0.38 3.38 -15.43 0.23 4.02
OVMD [56] -14.28 0.41 9.04 -9.39 0.52 1.13
DBTS (Ours) -13.13 0.47 17.14 -6.15 0.84 7.69
Higher values represent better fault evaluations in terms of the metrics applied. SNR: signal-to-noise ratio. OVMD: the optimized variational model decomposition
method. OEWT: the optimized empirical wavelet transform method. DBTS (Ours): the dynamic bandit tree search method.
we can conclude that the proposed method outperforms the can see, the proposed method offers the highest values of the
compared methods. metrics.
2) Algorithm Complexity
C. Further Discussion
First, we consider the binary tree with a tree depth l . Let n
1) Benchmarks in the Quantitative Analysis be the number of queries. Each query either generates two
Four recently proposed methods, the Hoyergram [12], nodes at a deeper tree level or reuses the old nodes when
Gini-index II and Gini-index III methods [17], and optimized reaching level l. For n queries, there are at most 2n nodes.
EWT (OEWT) [26], are considered in the quantitative analysis
However, a tree level i at most has 2i 1 nodes. Considering all
of fault evaluations. Three metrics, the vanilla signal to noise
levels, the tree has the number of all nodes at most exponential
ratio (SNR) in decibel (db) unit M vSNR , the mean amplitude of
in l , namely, O  2l  . Thus, the storage complexity of the tree
fault harmonics M mAmp , and the harmonic kurtosis M hKurt , are
developed and applied in the evaluation. We consider the is at most O  min(n, 2l 1 )  , where min   returns the smaller
evaluation of the first three fault harmonics in the normalized value. As for the time complexity, the parameters of the
SES. Let H i be the amplitude and hi be the frequency value of selected branch of nodes need to be updated at each query.
the i-th fault harmonic. Let S be the sum of amplitudes from There is only one node being selected at each level. A new
the frequency range [h1 / 2, h3  h1 / 2] . Let ki be the kurtosis query may follow the previous branch or follow a new branch.
Moreover, the selected branch is not necessarily equal to the
calculated using the amplitudes from the frequency range
longest branch. Therefore, the running time of parameter
[hi  h1 / 2, hi  h1 / 2] . Three metrics are defined as follows.
updates is at most O  min( n, l )  . Additionally, executing the
  3 Hi 
M vSNR  20 log10  i 1  (21) objective function runs in linear time, i.e., O  n  . Let d be the
 S   3 Hi  number of dimensions of the optimization problem. The storage
 i 1 
1 3 complexity is at most O  d min(n, 2l 1 )  and the time
M mAmp   i 1 H i (22)
3 complexity is at most O  d min(n, l )  n  . For the fixed d and l ,
1 3
M hKurt   i 1 ki (23) the storage complexity is constant and the time complexity is
3 linear in n. Taking two dimensional Rastrigin function as an
A higher value represents better estimation (clearness) of the example, DBT takes about 0.3 second to complete 1000 queries
fault harmonics in terms of the applied metric. The quantitative (CPU type is Intel(R) Core i7-10750H), which is affordable.
results of different methods are reported in TABLE II. As we

TMECH-12-2021-12856
V. CONCLUSION
Key summary. In this paper, we adapted the MAB
framework into machine fault diagnosis. Particularly, a bandit
tree optimization algorithm, the DBT, was proposed based on
the multi-tree space partition and the reshaped Thompson
sampling. The DBT was employed to optimize the Meyer
wavelet filters using the cyclic harmonic to noise ratio as the
fitness function for machine fault diagnosis. In simulation
experiments, we verified that DBT could outperform the kind
of optimization algorithms popularly used in machine fault
diagnosis. In fault diagnosis experiments, we demonstrated that
the proposed diagnosis method surpassed other
optimization-based methods and the popular kurtogram
(1/3-binary tree) method as well as its newest variants.
Advantages & disadvantages. Our proposed method has
two advantages: 1) more flexible and adaptive than fixed tree
filter methods as well as 2) effortless in parameter settings. The
disadvantages of our method mainly refer to the algorithm
complexities of DBT. It could have high computational burden
in problems of extremely high dimensions and applications
requiring really high resolutions.
Future work. We will study the regret analysis of DBT in
the future based on previous works [38][48][57]. In [38] the
regret of a UCB tree framework was analyzed. Additionally,
the regret of the standard Thompson sampling on the simple
bandit problem was given in [48]. Interestingly, the regrets of
the UCB and the standard Thompson frameworks can be
bridged in many cases [57]. Hence, the regret analysis of DBT
can be potentially researched. Better fault diagnosis methods
can be also proposed by reducing the complexities of DBT.
REFERENCES
[1] G. Li, J. Wu, C. Deng, X. Xu, and X. Shao, “Deep Reinforcement
Learning-Based Online Domain Adaptation Method for Fault Diagnosis
of Rotating Machinery,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, early access,
doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2021.3124415.
[2] S. Kim, D. An, and J.-H. Choi, “Diagnostics 101: A Tutorial for Fault
Diagnostics of Rolling Element Bearing Using Envelope Analysis in
MATLAB,” Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 20, Art. no. 20, Jan. 2020.
[3] R. B. Randall and J. Antoni, “Rolling element bearing diagnostics—A
tutorial,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 25, no. 2, pp.
485–520, Feb. 2011.
[4] Q. Miao and Q. Zhou, “Planetary Gearbox Vibration Signal
Characteristics Analysis and Fault Diagnosis,” Shock and Vibration, vol.
2015, pp. 1–8, 2015, Art. no. 126489.
[5] M. Wang, Z. Mo, H. Fu, H. Yu, and Q. Miao, “Harmonic L2/L1 Norm for
Bearing Fault Diagnosis,” IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 27313–27321, 2019.
[6] R. B. Randall, J. Antoni, and S. Chobsaard, “The relationship between
spectral correlation and envelope analysis in the diagnostics of bearing
faults and other cyclostationary machine signals,” Mech. Syst. Signal
Process., vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 945–962, 2001.
[7] M. -H. Wang, S. -D. Lu and R. -M. Liao, "Fault Diagnosis for Power
Cables Based on Convolutional Neural Network With Chaotic System
and Discrete Wavelet Transform," in IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 582-590, Feb. 2022.
[8] G. Lu, X. Wen, G. He, X. Yi, and P. Yan, “Early Fault Warning and
Identification in Condition Monitoring of Bearing via Wavelet Packet
Decomposition Coupled With Graph,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics,
early access, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2021.3110988.
[9] J. Antoni, “Fast computation of the kurtogram for the detection of
transient faults,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 108–124,
2007.
[10] J. Antoni, “The infogram: Entropic evidence of the signature of repetitive
transients,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., vol. 74, pp. 73–94, 2016.
[11] C. Luo, Z. Mo, and Q. Miao, “Cyclic Harmonic Ratio Defined in Squared
Envelope Spectrum and Log-Envelope Spectrum for Gearbox Fault
10
Diagnosis,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 9568-9577,
Dec. 2020.
[12] Z. Yang et al., “Fast nonlinear Hoyergram for bearings fault diagnosis
under random impact interference,” Meas. Sci. Technol., vol. 33, no. 7, p.
075112, Apr. 2022.
[13] Z. Feng, D. Zhang, and M. J. Zuo, “Adaptive Mode Decomposition
Methods and Their Applications in Signal Analysis for Machinery Fault
Diagnosis: A Review with Examples,” IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp.
24301–24331, 2017.
[14] Y. Sun, S. Li, Y. Wang, and X. Wang, “Fault diagnosis of rolling bearing
based on empirical mode decomposition and improved manhattan
distance in symmetrized dot pattern image,” Mechanical Systems and
Signal Processing, vol. 159, p. 107817, Oct. 2021.
[15] H. Ren, W. Liu, M. Shan, X. Wang, and Z. Wang, “A novel wind turbine
health condition monitoring method based on composite variational mode
entropy and weighted distribution adaptation,” Renewable Energy, vol.
168, pp. 972–980, May 2021.
[16] J. Gilles, "Empirical Wavelet Transform," IEEE Transactions on Signal
Processing, vol. 61, no. 16, pp. 3999-4010, Aug.15, 2013.
[17] B. Hou, D. Wang, T. Yan, Y. Wang, Z. Peng, and K.-L. Tsui, “Gini Indices
II and III: Two New Sparsity Measures and Their Applications to
Machine Condition Monitoring,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, early
access, doi: 10.1109/TMECH.2021.3100532.
[18] Z. Mo, H. Zhang, J. Wang, J. Wang, H. Fu, and Q. Miao, “Adaptive Meyer
wavelet filters for machinery fault diagnosis based on harmonic
infinite-taxicab norm and grasshopper optimization algorithm,” Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci., vol. 235, no.19, pp.4458-4474, Oct.
2020.
[19] P.-A. Coquelin and R. Munos, “Bandit algorithms for tree search,” in
Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial
Intelligence, Arlington, Virginia, USA, Jul. 2007, pp. 67–74.
[20] S. Bubeck, G. Stoltz, C. Szepesvári, and R. Munos, “Online Optimization
in X-Armed Bandits,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems, 2008, vol. 21.
[21] S. Wan and B. Peng, “Adaptive Asymmetric Real Laplace Wavelet
Filtering and Its Application on Rolling Bearing Early Fault Diagnosis,”
Shock Vib., vol. 2019, 2019, Art. no. 7475868.
[22] H. Shao, M. Xia, J. Wan, and C. De Silva, “Modified Stacked
Auto-encoder Using Adaptive Morlet Wavelet for Intelligent Fault
Diagnosis of Rotating Machinery,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics, vol.
27, no. 1, pp. 24-33, Feb. 2022.
[23] S. Stalin et al., “A Machine Learning-Based Big EEG Data Artifact
Detection and Wavelet-Based Removal: An Empirical Approach,”
Mathematical Problems in Engineering, vol. 2021, p.2942808, Oct. 2021.
[24] M. Ragab, O. A. Omer, and M. Abdel-Nasser, “Compressive sensing MRI
reconstruction using empirical wavelet transform and grey wolf
optimizer,” Neural Comput & Applic, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 2705–2724, Apr.
2020
[25] K. P. Kumar, C. V. Narasimhulu, and K. S. Prasad, “A new image
restoration approach by combining empirical wavelet transform and total
variation using chaotic squirrel search optimization,” International
Journal of Numerical Modelling: Electronic Networks, Devices and
Fields, vol. 34, no. 2, p. 2824, 2021
[26] D. Wang, K.-L. Tsui, and Y. Qin, “Optimization of segmentation
fragments in empirical wavelet transform and its applications to
extracting industrial bearing fault features,” Measurement, vol. 133, pp.
328–340, Feb. 2019.
[27] K. Yu, et al., “An adaptive sensitive frequency band selection method for
empirical wavelet transform and its application in bearing fault
diagnosis,” Measurement, vol. 134, pp. 375–384, Feb. 2019.
[28] M. Hu, G. Wang, K. Ma, Z. Cao, and S. Yang, “Bearing performance
degradation assessment based on optimized EWT and CNN,”
Measurement, vol. 172, p. 108868, Feb. 2021.
[29] Q. Zhang, J. Ding, and W. Zhao, “An adaptive boundary determination
method for empirical wavelet transform and its application in
wheelset-bearing fault detection in high-speed trains,” Measurement, vol.
171, p. 108746, Feb. 2021.
[30] Z. Shi, S. He, J. Chen, and Y. Zi, “A Dual-Guided Adaptive
Decomposition Method of Fault Information and Fault Sensitivity for
Multi-Component Fault Diagnosis Under Varying Speeds,” IEEE
Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 71, pp. 1–15,
2022.
[31] H. Yu, H. Li, and Y. Li, “Vibration signal fusion using improved empirical
wavelet transform and variance contribution rate for weak fault detection
of hydraulic pumps,” ISA Transactions, vol. 107, pp. 385–401, Dec. 2020.
View publication stats
TMECH-12-2021-12856
[32] Y. Xu, Y. Deng, C. Ma, and K. Zhang, “The Enfigram: A robust method
for extracting repetitive transients in rolling bearing fault diagnosis,”
Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 158, p. 107779, Sep.
2021.
[33] K. Zhang, P. Chen, M. Yang, L. Song, and Y. Xu, “The Harmogram: A
periodic impulses detection method and its application in bearing fault
diagnosis,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, vol. 165, p.
108374, Feb. 2022.
[34] A. D. Bull, “Adaptive-treed bandits,” Bernoulli, vol. 21, no. 4, Nov. 2015.
[35] T. Wang and C. Rudin, “Bandits for BMO Functions,” in Proceedings of
the 37th International Conference on Machine Learning, Nov. 2020, pp.
9996–10006.
[36] L. Wang, R. Fonseca, and Y. Tian, “Learning Search Space Partition for
Black-box Optimization using Monte Carlo Tree Search,” in Advances in
Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020, vol. 33, pp. 19511–19522.
[37] R. Sen, K. Kandasamy, and S. Shakkottai, “Noisy Blackbox Optimization
using Multi-fidelity Queries: A Tree Search Approach,” in Proceedings of
the Twenty-Second International Conference on Artificial Intelligence
and Statistics, Apr. 2019, pp. 2096–2105.
[38] T. Wang, W. Ye, D. Geng, and C. Rudin, “Towards Practical Lipschitz
Bandits,” in Proceedings of the 2020 ACM-IMS on Foundations of Data
Science Conference, Virtual Event USA, Oct. 2020, pp. 129–138.
[39] C. Fiegel, V. Gabillon, and M. Valko, “Adaptive multi-fidelity
optimization with fast learning rates,” in Proceedings of the Twenty Third
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Jun.
2020, pp. 3493–3502.
[40] C. Podimata and A. Slivkins, “Adaptive Discretization for Adversarial
Lipschitz Bandits,” in Proceedings of Thirty Fourth Conference on
Learning Theory, Jul. 2021, pp. 3788–3805.
[41] J. Grant and D. Leslie, “On Thompson Sampling for
Smoother-than-Lipschitz Bandits,” in Proceedings of the Twenty Third
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Jun.
2020, pp. 2612–2622.
[42] A. Hüyük and C. Tekin, “Thompson Sampling for Combinatorial
Network Optimization in Unknown Environments,” IEEE/ACM
Transactions on Networking, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 2836–2849, Dec. 2020
[43] H. Park and M. K. Shirani Faradonbeh, “Analysis of Thompson Sampling
for Partially Observable Contextual Multi-Armed Bandits,” IEEE Control
Syst. Lett., vol. 6, pp. 2150–2155, 2022
[44] S. Kumar, H. Gao, C. Wang, K. C.-C. Chang, and H. Sundaram,
“Decision tree Thompson sampling for mining hidden populations
through attributed search,” Soc. Netw. Anal. Min., vol. 12, no. 1, p. 6, Dec.
2022
[45] S. Vakili, H. Moss, A. Artemev, V. Dutordoir, and V. Picheny, “Scalable
Thompson Sampling using Sparse Gaussian Process Models,” in
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2021, vol. 34, pp.
5631–5643.
[46] T. Lattimore and C. Szepesvári, “Bandit Algorithms,” Cambridge
University Press, 2020, pp.88-1140.
[47] D. J. Russo, B. Van Roy, A. Kazerouni, I. Osband, and Z. Wen, “A tutorial
on Thompson sampling,” Found. Trends Mach. Learn., vol. 11, no. 1, pp.
1–96, 2018.
[48] S. Agrawal and N. Goyal, “Further optimal regret bounds for thompson
sampling,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 31, pp. 99–107, 2013.
[49] C. B. Browne et al., “A survey of Monte Carlo tree search methods,”
IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–43, 2012.
[50] Z. Mo, J. Wang, H. Zhang and Q. Miao, "Weighted Cyclic
Harmonic-to-Noise Ratio for Rolling Element Bearing Fault Diagnosis,"
in IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 69, no. 2,
pp. 432-442, Feb. 2020.
[51] A. Reda and Z. C. Johanyák, “Survey on five nature-Inspired
Optimization Algorithms,” Gradus, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 173–183, 2021.
[52] Nguyen Van Thieu, “A collection of the state-of-the-art MEta-heuristics
Algorithms in Python: Mealpy”, Zenodo, March, 2020, doi:
10.5281/zenodo.3711948.
[53] I. Ahmadianfar, O. Bozorg-Haddad, and X. Chu, “Gradient-based
optimizer: A new metaheuristic optimization algorithm,” Information
Sciences, vol. 540, pp. 131–159, Nov. 2020.
[54] F. A. Hashim, K. Hussain, E. H. Houssein, M. S. Mabrouk, and W.
Al-Atabany, “Archimedes optimization algorithm: a new metaheuristic
algorithm for solving optimization problems,” Appl Intell, vol. 51, no. 3,
pp. 1531–1551, Mar. 2021.
[55] T. Rahkar Farshi, “Battle royale optimization algorithm,” Neural Comput
& Applic, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1139–1157, Feb. 2021.
11
[56] X. B. Wang, Z. X. Yang, and X. A. Yan, “Novel particle swarm
optimization-based variational mode decomposition method for the fault
diagnosis of complex rotating machinery,” IEEE/ASME Trans.
Mechatronics, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 68–79, 2018.
[57] D. Russo and B. Van Roy, “Learning to Optimize via Posterior
Sampling,” Mathematics of OR, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 1221–1243, Nov.
2014.
Zhenling Mo received his B.Eng. degree from the
School of Mechanical Science and Engineering,
Huazhong University of Science and Technology,
Hubei, China, in 2017. He also received a M.S. degree
from the School of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Sichuan University, Sichuan, China, in 2020. He is
now studying towards the Ph.D. degree at the School of
Data Science, City University of Hong Kong, Hong
Kong, China.
His current research interests include signal processing, machine learning,
and machinery fault diagnosis.
Zijun Zhang (M'12-SM'21) received his Ph.D. and
M.S. degrees in Industrial Engineering from the
University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA, in 2012 and
2009, respectively, and B.Eng. degree in Systems
Engineering and Engineering Management from the
Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong,
China, in 2008
Currently, he is an Associate Professor in the School
of Data Science at City University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong, China.
His research focuses on data mining and
computational intelligence with applications in
renewable energy, facility energy management, and intelligent transportation
domains. He is an editor of IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy and an
associate editor of the Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing.
Qiang Miao (M’06, SM’12) received the B.E. and
the M.S. degrees in reliability engineering from the
Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Beijing, China, in 1998 and 2001, respectively, and
the Ph.D. degree in industrial engineering from the
University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, in 2005.
He is currently a Professor with the College of
Electrical Engineering, Sichuan University, Chengdu,
China. In the past years, he received more than 40
research grants, and authored or coauthored more
than 90 research papers and holds 15 patents. His
current research focuses on reliability and health
assessment.
Dr. Miao has been a Senior Member of the IEEE Reliability Society since
2012. He is currently the IEEE RS AdCom (2019-now), and the IEEE RS Vice
President (2020-now). He acts as associate editor of IEEE Transactions on
Reliability and IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.
Kwok-Leung Tsui received the Ph.D. degree in
statistics from the University of Wisconsin–Madison,
Madison, WI, USA, in 1986. He is a Professor with the
Grado Department of Industrial and Systems
Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic and State University,
Blacksburg, VA, USA.
His current research interests include data science
and data analytics, surveillance in healthcare and public
health, personalized health monitoring, prognostics and
systems health management, calibration and validation of computer models,
process control and monitoring, and robust design and Taguchi methods.
Dr. Tsui is a Fellow of the American Statistical Association, American
Society for Quality, the International Society of Engineering Asset
Management, and the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers; an elected Council
Member of the International Statistical Institute, and a U.S. Representative to
the ISO Technical Committee on Statistical Methods. He was a recipient of the
National Science Foundation Young Investigator Award. He was the Chair of
the INFORMS Section on Quality, Statistics, and Reliability and the Founding
Chair of the INFORMS Section on Data Mining.