PHM’11 Best Paper Nominees

Category: Theoretical Paper

• Distributed Damage Estimation for Prognostics based on Structural Model Decomposition
  – Matthew Daigle, Anibal Bregon, and Indranil Roychoudhury
• A Combined Anomaly Detection and Failure Prognosis Approach for Estimation of Remaining Useful Life in Energy Storage Devices
  – Marcos E. Orchard, Liang Tang, and George J. Vachtsevanos
• Investigating the Effect of Damage Progression Model Choice on Prognostics Performance
  – Matthew Daigle, Indranil Roychoudhury, Sriram Narasimhan, Sankalita Saha, Bhaskar Saha, and Kai Goebel
• Bayesian Fatigue Damage and Reliability Analysis using Laplace Approximation and Inverse Reliability Method
  – Xuefei Guan, Jingjing He, Ratneshwar Jha, and Yongming Liu

Category: Application Paper

• Gear Health Threshold Setting Based On a Probability of False Alarm
  – Eric Bechhoefer, David He, and Paula Dempsey
• A Model-Based Prognostics Methodology for Electrolytic Capacitors Based on Electrical Overstress Accelerated Aging
  – Jose R. Celaya, Chetan Kulkarni, Gautam Biswas, Sankalita Saha, and Kai Goebel
• A Mobile Robot Testbed for Prognostics-Enabled Autonomous Decision Making
  – Edward Balaban, Sriram Narasimhan, Matthew Daigle, Jose Celaya, Indranil Roychoudhury, Bhaskar Saha, Sankalita Saha, and Kai Goebel
• Fault-Tolerant Trajectory Tracking Control of a Quadrotor Helicopter Using Gain-Scheduled PID and Model Reference Adaptive Control
  – Iman Sadeghzadeh, Ankit Mehta, Youmin Zhang, and Camille-Alain Rabbath

Selection Process

During the regular review process, reviewers had the option to nominate any paper they reviewed for the Best Paper Award. This selection process identified 8 papers for the award. The papers were further reviewed in a double blind fashion. The names and affiliations of the authors were removed from the papers. A six member team including the technical program committee then reviewed all papers and categorized each paper in either the Application or Theory categories. The papers were scored (on a scale of 1 to 5, 5 being the highest) for a set of criteria such that a paper could score a maximum of 100. The criteria and their corresponding weights assigned were Content (3), Significance (5), Technical validity (3), Innovation (3), Writing style (1), Accuracy (1), Clarity (2), Simplicity (1), and Readability (1) . The scores from all the judges were aggregated to get the final score and a majority rule was applied to determine the category of the paper. Finally, the paper that scored highest in each category was selected as the Best Paper.

These papers have been marked with a star for easy look-up in the conference agenda and the new “add to calendar” feature will let you conveniently plan your itinerary at the conference.