In situations where the cost/benefit analysis of using physics-based damage propagation algorithms is not favorable and when sufficient test data are available that map out the damage space, one can employ data-driven approaches. In this investigation, we evaluate different algorithms for their suitability in those circumstances. We are interested in assessing the trade-off that arises from the ability to support uncertainty management, and the accuracy of the predictions. We compare here a Relevance Vector Machine (RVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), and a Neural Network-based approach and employ them on relatively sparse training sets with very high noise content. Results show that while all methods can provide remaining life estimates although different damage estimates of the data (diagnostic output) changes the outcome considerably. In addition, we found that there is a need for performance metrics that provide a comprehensive and objective assessment of prognostics algorithm performance.

In situations where the cost/benefit analysis of using physics-based damage propagation algorithms is not favorable and when sufficient test data are available that map out the damage space, one can employ data-driven approaches. In this investigation, we evaluate different algorithms for their suitability in those circumstances. We are interested in assessing the trade-off that arises from the ability to support uncertainty management, and the accuracy of the predictions. We compare here a Relevance Vector Machine (RVM), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), and a Neural Network-based approach and employ them on relatively sparse training sets with very high noise content. Results show that while all methods can provide remaining life estimates although different damage estimates of the data (diagnostic output) changes the outcome considerably. In addition, we found that there is a need for performance metrics that provide a comprehensive and objective assessment of prognostics algorithm performance.