The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Remaining Useful Lifetime Prediction and Noisy Stochastic Deterioration Process Considering Sensor Degradation
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For instance, current studies frequently overlook shocks or assume their effects are constant (Hachem et al., 2021), failing to capture the stochastic nature of these events.”
From Impact of Sensor Degradation on Measurement Uncertainty in Prognostics and Maintenance Decision-Making: State of the art and challenges (2025) · cites this paper as Hachem et al., 2021
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Thai, T.-T. N., Do, P., Iung, B., & Gardoni, P. (2025) · International Journal of Prognostics and Health Management · doi:10.36001/ijphm.2025.v16i4.4306 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Hachem, H., Canh Vu, H., & Fouladirad, M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 31st European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL 2021)
- Publisher
- Research Publishing Services
- Published
- 2021
- Pages
- 282-287
- OpenAlex
- W3202611280
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 0.61
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Reliability and Maintenance Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Machine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Fault Detection and Control Systems
- Keywords
- remaining useful life prediction, sensor degradation, prognostics, degradation modeling
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
