跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2605.31281 · v3

Wind Turbine Maintenance Log Labelling Framework: LLM-Driven Data Correction and Enrichment via Semantic Extraction of Reliability Intelligence

首次提交 2026-05-29 21:13
版本更新 2026-11-06 05:28
雷达观测 2026-11-09 10:16
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Inconsistent codes and unstructured text limit the use of wind turbine maintenance records in reliability analysis. A topology-aware large language model (LLM) workflow corrected and enriched 16,316 records from 280 turbines at 31 onshore wind farms over 9.2 years. Maintenance narratives and equipment context guided system-code correction and maintenance-type relabelling. System- and topology-specific batches yielded candidate action and failure-mode taxonomies for record-level labelling. Failure-mode profiles linked labels to common mechanisms, possible symptoms and candidate causes. Schema constraints, deterministic rules and source links supported auditable processing. Proposed labels required model-reported High confidence and no human-review flag. Accepted system-code updates covered 2,178 of 2,984 targeted records; accepted failure-mode labels covered 11,661 records (71.5%). The enriched fields separated pitch interventions from broader system categories and distinguished electrical and hydraulic pitch maintenance patterns. Recorded task durations totalled 6.83 hours. A source-based assessment covered 800 records selected by balanced probability sampling. Changed system codes and maintenance types required source support; retained specific labels were approved unless contradicted. Equal-weight mean approval across four fields was 86.3%: 94.8% for system codes, 87.3% for maintenance types, 85.6% for actions and 77.5% for failure-mode outcomes. Failure-mode assessment covered titles and unresolved, unmatched or inapplicable statuses. Qualitative reviews identified unsupported actions and unclear category boundaries. The structured records provide traceable evidence for engineering review and future operational linkage supporting event reconstruction, exposure-based reliability analysis and failure modes and effects analysis.

作者备注:An adjustable template containing the Python script architecture, applied dynamic prompts, and data schemas is hosted in an open-source GitHub repository: https://github.com/mvmalyi/llm-driven-wind-turbine-maintenance-log-labelling

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v3 · 2026-11-06 05:28 · 最新观测版本

Wind Turbine Maintenance Log Labelling Framework: LLM-Driven Data Correction and Enrichment via Semantic Extraction of Reliability Intelligence

Inconsistent codes and unstructured text limit the use of wind turbine maintenance records in reliability analysis. A topology-aware large language model (LLM) workflow corrected and enriched 16,316 records from 280 turbines at 31 onshore wind farms over 9.2 years. Maintenance narratives and equipment context guided system-code correction and maintenance-type relabelling. System- and topology-specific batches yielded candidate action and failure-mode taxonomies for record-level labelling. Failure-mode profiles linked labels to common mechanisms, possible symptoms and candidate causes. Schema constraints, deterministic rules and source links supported auditable processing. Proposed labels required model-reported High confidence and no human-review flag. Accepted system-code updates covered 2,178 of 2,984 targeted records; accepted failure-mode labels covered 11,661 records (71.5%). The enriched fields separated pitch interventions from broader system categories and distinguished electrical and hydraulic pitch maintenance patterns. Recorded task durations totalled 6.83 hours. A source-based assessment covered 800 records selected by balanced probability sampling. Changed system codes and maintenance types required source support; retained specific labels were approved unless contradicted. Equal-weight mean approval across four fields was 86.3%: 94.8% for system codes, 87.3% for maintenance types, 85.6% for actions and 77.5% for failure-mode outcomes. Failure-mode assessment covered titles and unresolved, unmatched or inapplicable statuses. Qualitative reviews identified unsupported actions and unclear category boundaries. The structured records provide traceable evidence for engineering review and future operational linkage supporting event reconstruction, exposure-based reliability analysis and failure modes and effects analysis.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗