TARD: Test-time Domain Adaptation for Robust Fault Detection under Evolving Operating Conditions

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2507.16354
• Title: TARD: Test-time Domain Adaptation for Robust Fault Detection under Evolving Operating Conditions
• Authors: Han Sun, Olga Fink (EPFL)
• Classification: stat.AP (Statistics - Applications)
• Publication Date: October 13, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.16354

Abstract

Fault detection in industrial systems is crucial for preventing failures and optimizing performance. With the increasing availability of condition monitoring data, data-driven methods have been widely adopted for fault detection. However, these methods typically require large-scale, diverse, and representative training datasets, which are difficult to obtain in practice, particularly during early deployment stages. Industrial systems often operate under highly variable and continuously evolving conditions, leading to distribution shifts between training and test data. To address these challenges, this paper proposes TARD, a novel continuous test-time domain adaptation method specifically designed to support robust early fault detection under domain shift and limited training data conditions.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problems

1. Data Scarcity: Industrial systems, particularly newly deployed or refurbished equipment, lack comprehensive historical data, with fault data being extremely scarce
2. Domain Shift Challenges: Significant differences exist in operating conditions between different equipment units and within the same system over time, violating the i.i.d assumption of traditional machine learning
3. Dynamic Environments: Industrial systems operate in continuously evolving environments, requiring continuous adaptation rather than discrete domain adaptation

Research Significance

• Early fault detection is critical for optimizing system performance, minimizing maintenance costs, and reducing asset unavailability
• Existing methods suffer from high false positive rates and reduced detection accuracy when facing distribution shifts
• There is a need to support fleet-level knowledge transfer, transferring experience from data-rich systems to data-scarce new systems

Limitations of Existing Methods

1. Traditional Domain Adaptation: Requires substantial source and target domain data, typically requiring labeled fault data
2. Static Adaptation: Most methods assume discrete static domain characteristics, unable to handle continuously evolving operating conditions
3. Test-time Adaptation Risks: Existing TTA methods may incorrectly adapt fault patterns to normal behavior

Core Contributions

1. Proposes TARD Framework: A continuous test-time domain adaptation framework specifically designed for unsupervised fault detection, completely independent of labeled fault data
2. Innovative Feature Separation Strategy: Explicitly separates input variables into control parameters and sensor measurements, employing specialized adaptation strategies for each category
3. Practical Framework: Requires only limited normal samples from the target system, suitable for early deployment and fleet-level knowledge transfer
4. Empirical Validation: Validates the method's effectiveness through real case studies on two multiphase flow facilities

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Given:

• Rich healthy training data from source system: $X^s = [x^s_1, \cdots, x^s_n]$
• Limited normal data from target domain: $X^t = [x^t_1, \cdots, x^t_m]$

Objective: Achieve robust fault detection in target domain $t$, considering:

• Both domains lack fault training data
• Limited target domain data availability
• Continuous distribution shifts during inference

System Variable Classification

Input data is divided into two groups: $X = [x, w]$

• Control Variables $w$: System condition control variables set by operators or control systems
• Sensor Measurements $x$: Sensor signals monitoring system components and reflecting real-time system status

Model Architecture

1. Reconstruction-based Anomaly Detection

Employs autoencoder $f_\theta$ as the reconstruction model, trained on source domain normal data: $\text{loss}_{MSE} = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{1}^{n}(X^s - \hat{X}^s)^2$

2. Test-time Domain Adaptation Module

Introduces adaptation module $h_\phi$, rather than directly modifying the reconstruction model:

• Input: Control variables $w$ and predictions from the pretrained autoencoder
• Output: Compensation term $\Delta x$
• Design Rationale: Avoids adapting to potentially faulty data distributions

3. Key Technical Features

• Frozen Main Model: Pretrained autoencoder $f_\theta$ remains frozen during adaptation
• AdaBN Layers: Integrates adaptive batch normalization layers in the adaptation module, updating mean and variance based on batch statistics
• Separated Adaptation: Adaptation applied only to control variables, protecting anomaly detection capability of sensor measurements

Scoring and Fault Detection Mechanism

Relative Residual Calculation

$r_i = \frac{|\hat{X}_i - X_i|}{\bar{X}_{t\_training}}$

Anomaly Score

$s_i = \frac{1}{k}\sum_{j=1}^{k}r_i^j + \max\sum_{j=1}^{k}r_i^j$

Temporal Smoothing

$s_{i\_smooth} = \text{mean}\sum_{q=0}^{l-1}s_{i+q}$

Fault Decision

$s_{i\_smooth} > \alpha \cdot \bar{r}_{t\_training}$

Experimental Setup

Datasets

1. Cranfield Three-phase Flow Facility

• Monitored Variables: 24 process variables (pressure, flow rate, liquid level, density, temperature, valve position)
• Control Variables: Air and water flow rate setpoints
• Fault Types: 6 types (air line blockage, water line blockage, top separator inlet blockage, direct bypass opening, slug flow conditions, 2-inch line pressurization)
• Sampling Frequency: 1 Hz

2. PRONTO Heterogeneous Benchmark Dataset

• Monitored Variables: 15 process variables
• Operating Conditions: 20 different air and water flow rate combinations
• Fault Types: 3 types (air leak, air blockage, flow diversion)
• Sampling Frequency: 1 Hz

Evaluation Metrics

• Accuracy: Overall prediction correctness rate
• F1 Score: Harmonic mean of precision and recall
• AUC: Area under the ROC curve

Comparison Methods

• Baseline: Model trained only on source domain
• AdaBN: Adaptive batch normalization
• MMD: Maximum mean discrepancy

Implementation Details

• Optimizer: Adam, learning rate 1e-5
• Batch Size: 128
• Training Epochs: 500 for autoencoder, 50 for adaptation module
• Architecture: 3-layer fully connected encoder and decoder, dimensions 50-50-10

Experimental Results

Main Results

Cranfield Dataset Results

PRONTO Dataset Results

Ablation Studies

Under different operating conditions for the Cranfield top separator blockage case:

• Variable Conditions: TARD performs best in dynamic environments (F1: 0.86 vs MMD: 0.79)
• Steady-state Conditions: TARD maintains advantages across most steady-state conditions

Uncertainty Quantification

Deep ensemble validation (10 independent models) confirms high confidence in TARD detection results, with uncertainty bands remaining narrow during fault detection (standard deviation approximately 0.8).

High-dimensional Synthetic Data Experiments

• 100-dimensional Sensors: F1 improved from 0.42 to 0.67
• 1000-dimensional Sensors: F1 improved from 0.10 to 0.48
• Inference Latency: Maintained within real-time monitoring requirements (<2ms)

Related Work

Fault Detection Methods

1. Probabilistic Models: Gaussian mixture models, energy-based models
2. One-class Classification: Discriminative boundary methods such as support vector machines
3. Reconstruction Methods: Reconstruction error-based methods such as autoencoders

Fleet-level Fault Detection

• Homogeneous Sub-fleets: Similarity clustering-based methods
• Functional Representation Learning: Methods learning overall fleet behavior
• Limitations: Depend on sufficient similarity assumptions

Domain Adaptation Applications in Fault Detection

• Discrepancy Minimization Methods: Statistical distance minimization such as MMD
• Adversarial Methods: Domain discriminator networks such as DANN
• Test-time Adaptation: Methods such as Tent and SHOT
• Challenges: Require labeled data, assume static domains, may adapt to fault data

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. TARD successfully addresses three major challenges in industrial fault detection: lack of labeled fault data, limited target domain data, and continuous domain shift
2. The feature separation strategy effectively distinguishes between operating condition changes and actual faults
3. Significantly outperforms existing domain adaptation methods on two real industrial datasets

Limitations

1. Parameter Tuning: Fault detection sensitivity parameter α requires manual setting
2. Major System Changes: Lacks protective mechanisms for handling permanent major system changes
3. Temporal Dynamics: Current residual smoothing strategy may lose important temporal details

Future Directions

1. Automatic Protection Mechanisms: Develop methods to detect major domain shifts and trigger adaptation module retraining
2. Adaptive Parameter Adjustment: Methods for automatically adjusting sensitivity parameter α
3. Time Series Analysis: Introduce specialized time series models to analyze complex patterns in residual sequences

In-depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Strong Practicality: Addresses real challenges in industry, requiring only limited normal data
2. Technical Innovation: Clever and effective design of feature separation and specialized adaptation strategies
3. Comprehensive Experiments: Full validation with two real industrial datasets plus high-dimensional synthetic data
4. Solid Theoretical Foundation: Clear problem definition and method motivation

Weaknesses

1. Limited Scope: Primarily validated on multiphase flow systems; generalization to other industrial systems remains to be verified
2. Theoretical Analysis: Lacks theoretical guarantees on method convergence and stability
3. Computational Overhead: While inference time is reported, detailed computational complexity analysis is lacking
4. Hyperparameter Sensitivity: Insufficient sensitivity analysis for critical hyperparameters (e.g., α, window length l)

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new research directions for industrial fault detection
2. Practical Value: Directly applicable to industrial deployment, particularly for early monitoring of new equipment
3. Reproducibility: Provides detailed implementation details and algorithm descriptions

Applicable Scenarios

1. Newly Deployed Systems: Industrial equipment with limited historical data
2. Fleet Management: Scenarios requiring cross-device knowledge transfer
3. Dynamic Environments: Industrial systems with continuously changing operating conditions
4. Critical Infrastructure: Important industrial systems sensitive to false alarms

References

The paper cites 51 related references covering important works in fault detection, domain adaptation, and deep learning, providing a solid theoretical foundation for the research.

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality applied statistics paper that successfully applies domain adaptation techniques to the important practical problem of industrial fault detection. The method design is sound, experimental validation is comprehensive, and it possesses strong practical value and academic significance.