Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

2.3K
Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
2.3K
Regulated Protein Degradation02:58

Regulated Protein Degradation

7.6K
It is vital to regulate the activity of enzymatic as well as non-enzymatic proteins inside the cell. This can be achieved either through creating a balance between their rate of synthesis and degradation or regulating the intrinsic activity of the protein. Both these regulation mechanisms play an essential role in the normal functioning of cells.
Protein degradation plays two important roles in the cells. It helps to protect cells from misfolded or damaged proteins before they lead to a...
7.6K
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection01:05

Difference from Background: Limit of Detection

7.0K
The limit of detection (LOD) is the smallest amount of analyte that can be distinguished from the background noise. The LOD value corresponds to the concentration at which the analyte signal is three times larger than the standard deviation of the blank signal. Below this value, the analyte signal cannot be differentiated from the background noise. It is calculated by dividing the calibration slope by 3 times the standard deviation of the blank signals.
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
7.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Federated continual learning for vision-based plastic classification in recycling.

Waste management (New York, N.Y.)·2025
Same author

Towards a Recommender System for In-Vehicle Antenna Placement in Harsh Propagation Environments.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2022
Same author

Overview obstacle maps for obstacle-aware navigation of autonomous drones.

Journal of field robotics·2019
Same journal

RETRACTED: Zhang et al. A Novel Framework for Reconstruction and Imaging of Target Scattering Centers via Wide-Angle Incidence in Radar Networks. <i>Sensors</i> 2025, <i>25</i>, 6802.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Enhancing Unsupervised Multi-Source Domain Adaptation for Person Re-Identification via Mixture of Experts and Graph-Based Relation.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Development of an Instrumented Glove for Palmar Pressure Assessment in Kayakers.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Development and Experimental Validation of an Autonomous IoT-Based Monitoring System for Real-Time Water Quality Assessment in the Amazon River.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Semi-Supervised Adversarial Learning Framework for Controller Area Network Bus Intrusion Detection.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same journal

Smart Optimization Method for Safety Signs in Innovative Manufacturing Environments Integrating Industrial Field IoT Sensors and Knowledge Graphs.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 6, 2025

In Situ Soil Moisture Sensors in Undisturbed Soils
08:20

In Situ Soil Moisture Sensors in Undisturbed Soils

Published on: November 18, 2022

6.5K

Degradation Detection in a Redundant Sensor Architecture.

Amer Kajmakovic1,2,3, Konrad Diwold1,2, Kay Römer2

  • 1Pro2Future GmbH, 8010 Graz, Austria.

Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
|June 24, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a new fault prognosis algorithm for one-out-of-two (1oo2) sensor systems. The algorithm predicts sensor failures by analyzing discrepancy trends, enabling proactive maintenance and preventing system shutdowns.

Keywords:
1oo2 architecturedegradationdiscrepancydriftredundant sensors

More Related Videos

Design and Analysis for Fall Detection System Simplification
08:05

Design and Analysis for Fall Detection System Simplification

Published on: April 6, 2020

10.8K
Microfluidic Platform with Multiplexed Electronic Detection for Spatial Tracking of Particles
11:54

Microfluidic Platform with Multiplexed Electronic Detection for Spatial Tracking of Particles

Published on: March 13, 2017

9.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Sep 6, 2025

In Situ Soil Moisture Sensors in Undisturbed Soils
08:20

In Situ Soil Moisture Sensors in Undisturbed Soils

Published on: November 18, 2022

6.5K
Design and Analysis for Fall Detection System Simplification
08:05

Design and Analysis for Fall Detection System Simplification

Published on: April 6, 2020

10.8K
Microfluidic Platform with Multiplexed Electronic Detection for Spatial Tracking of Particles
11:54

Microfluidic Platform with Multiplexed Electronic Detection for Spatial Tracking of Particles

Published on: March 13, 2017

9.4K

Area of Science:

  • Automation and Control Systems
  • Reliability Engineering
  • Sensor Technology

Background:

  • Safety-critical automation relies on redundant systems for dependable operation.
  • The one-out-of-two (1oo2) sensor architecture uses redundant sensors to ensure reliability and traceability of readings.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To propose a novel fault prognosis algorithm for 1oo2 sensor systems based on discrepancy signal analysis.
  • To analyze discrepancy changes caused by degradation processes in 1oo2 sensor configurations.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of discrepancy signal changes in 1oo2 sensor configurations using publicly available databases.
  • Application and evaluation of two trend detection methods for discrepancy data.
  • Training and comparison of several models to describe discrepancy dynamics.
  • Prediction of future discrepancy behavior to identify critical failure points.

Main Results:

  • Discrepancy between redundant sensors exhibits changes (increase or decrease) over time due to degradation.
  • Trend detection methods effectively identify increases or decreases in discrepancy data.
  • Specific models were identified as best fitting for describing discrepancy dynamics.
  • The developed models successfully predict future discrepancy behavior and potential failure times.

Conclusions:

  • The proposed fault prognosis algorithm can predict sensor failure dates based on discrepancy signal analysis.
  • Predictive maintenance scheduling can be implemented to prevent system entry into a safe state or shutdown.
  • This approach enhances the reliability and operational continuity of safety-critical automated systems.