The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 80 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Survey of Fault Detection, Isolation, and Reconfiguration Methods
Abstract
Fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration (FDIR) is an important and challenging problem in many engineering applications and continues to be an active area of research in the control community. This paper presents a survey of the various model-based FDIR methods developed in the last decade. In the paper, the FDIR problem is divided into the fault detection and isolation (FDI) step, and the controller reconfiguration step. For FDI, we discuss various model-based techniques to generate residuals that are robust to noise, unknown disturbance, and model uncertainties, as well as various statistical techniques of testing the residuals for abrupt changes (or faults). We then discuss various techniques of implementing reconfigurable control strategy in response to faults.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
PAGE, E. S. (1954) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/41.1-2.100 · Cited by 5,739
Robust Model-Based Fault Diagnosis for Dynamic Systems
Chen, J., & Patton, R. J. (1999) · The International Series on Asian Studies in Computer and Information Science · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-5149-2 · Cited by 4,262
Detection of Abrupt Changes: Theory and Application
Riedel, K. S. (1994) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1994.10485821 · Cited by 3,518
A review of process fault detection and diagnosis
Venkatasubramanian, V., Rengaswamy, R., Yin, K., & Kavuri, S. N. (2003) · Computers & Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/s0098-1354(02)00160-6 · Cited by 2,723
Subspace Identification for Linear Systems
Van Overschee, P., & De Moor, B. (1996) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-0465-4 · Cited by 2,586
Process fault detection based on modeling and estimation methods—A survey
Isermann, R. (1984) · Automatica · doi:10.1016/0005-1098(84)90098-0 · Cited by 2,364
A survey of design methods for failure detection in dynamic systems
Willsky, A. S. (1976) · Automatica · doi:10.1016/0005-1098(76)90041-8 · Cited by 2,153
Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Engineering Systems
Gertler, J. J. (2017) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203756126 · Cited by 1,999
A review of process fault detection and diagnosis
Venkatasubramanian, V., Rengaswamy, R., Kavuri, S. N., & Yin, K. (2003) · Computers & Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/s0098-1354(02)00162-x · Cited by 1,859
Stochastic models, estimation, and control
(1979) · Mathematics in Science and Engineering · doi:10.1016/s0076-5392(08)x6125-9 · Cited by 1,624
Cited by
Gao, Z., Cecati, C., & Ding, S. X. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · doi:10.1109/tie.2015.2417501 · Cited by 3,135
Hu, X., Zhang, K., Liu, K., Lin, X., Dey, S., & Onori, S. (2020) · IEEE Industrial Electronics Magazine · doi:10.1109/mie.2020.2964814 · Cited by 580
A survey of physics-based attack detection in cyber-physical systems
Giraldo, J., Urbina, D., Cardenas, A., Valente, J., Faisal, M., Ruths, J., Tippenhauer, N. O., Sandberg, H., & Candell, R. (2019) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3203245 · Cited by 535
Bayesian Networks in Fault Diagnosis
Cai, B., Huang, L., & Xie, M. (2017) · IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · doi:10.1109/tii.2017.2695583 · Cited by 474
Wei, Z., Zhao, J., He, H., Ding, G., Cui, H., & Liu, L. (2021) · Journal of Power Sources · doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2021.229462 · Cited by 348
Metadata
- Authors
- Hwang, I., Kim, S., Kim, Y., & Seah, C. E.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology
- Published
- 2010-05
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 636-653
- ISSN
- 1063-6536 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0865
- OpenAlex
- W2102832680
- Cited by
- 1,305
- References
- 80
- FWCI
- 45.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Survey of Fault Detection, Isolation, and Reconfiguration Methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tcst.2009.2026285
- The paper
- Hwang, I., Kim, S., Kim, Y., & Seah, C. E. (2010). A Survey of Fault Detection, Isolation, and Reconfiguration Methods. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology. https://doi.org/10.1109/tcst.2009.2026285
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
