A comprehensive review and evaluation framework for data-driven prognostics

Uncertainty, robustness, interpretability, and feasibility

Review (2025)
Author(s)

M. Salinas-Camus (TU Delft - Group Eleftheroglou)

Kai Goebel (Luleå University of Technology, Fragum Global)

N. Eleftheroglou (TU Delft - Group Eleftheroglou)

Research Group
Group Eleftheroglou
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2025.113015
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
Group Eleftheroglou
Volume number
237
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Prognostics and Health Management (PHM) is critical for predicting the Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of systems, a key enabler of Predictive Maintenance (PdM). This paper reviews state-of-the-art data-driven prognostic models, emphasizing four essential characteristics: uncertainty, robustness, interpretability, and feasibility. While traditional research has focused on enhancing RUL prediction accuracy, this review argues that these additional characteristics are equally vital for addressing the demands of PHM applications. The review examines Machine Learning (ML) techniques, stochastic models, and Bayesian filters (BFs), analyzing their strengths, limitations, and trade-offs. ML models excel in accuracy but often lack robust uncertainty quantification and adaptability across varying operational conditions. Stochastic models demonstrate greater robustness and feasibility, performing reliably with limited or variable data. Bayesian filters provide high interpretability and do not require run-to-failure data but face challenges in adapting to diverse environments. To bridge these gaps, this paper proposes a structured Model Evaluation Framework that integrates users’ specific needs with key model characteristics identified in the review. By quantifying the importance of the four characteristics, the framework enables systematic evaluation and selection of prognostic models. The findings underscore the need for advancements in uncertainty quantification, adaptive methods to improve robustness, and enhanced interpretability to meet practical and regulatory requirements. While current models offer valuable insights, further improvements are necessary to unlock their full potential for PHM and PdM applications, ensuring more reliable and actionable predictions.