This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
en:iot-reloaded:introduction_to_time_series_analysis [2024/11/18 10:33] – agrisnik | en:iot-reloaded:introduction_to_time_series_analysis [2025/05/13 14:59] (current) – [A cooling system case] pczekalski | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
====== Introduction to Time Series Analysis ====== | ====== Introduction to Time Series Analysis ====== | ||
- | {{: | + | As discussed in the data preparation chapter, time series usually represent the dynamics of some process. Therefore, the order of the data entries has to be preserved. As emphasised, a time series is simply a set of data—usually events—arranged by a time marker. Typically, time series are placed in the order in which events occur/are recorded. |
- | As has been discussed previously in the data preparation chapter, time series | + | In the context of IoT systems, there might be several reasons why time series |
+ | The most widely used ones are the following: | ||
+ | * **Process | ||
+ | * **Anomaly detection** is a highly valued feature of IoT systems. In its essence, anomaly detection | ||
+ | * **A certain event in time:** for instance, a measurement jumps over a defined threshold value. This is the simplest type of anomaly, and most control systems cope with it by setting appropriate threshold values and alerting mechanisms. | ||
+ | * **Change of a data fragment shape:** This might happen to technical systems, where a typical response to control inputs has changed to some shape that is not anticipated or planned. A simple example is an engine' | ||
+ | * **Event density:** Many technical systems' | ||
+ | * **Event value distribution: | ||
+ | | ||
+ | Due to its diversity, various algorithms might be used in anomaly detection, including those covered in previous chapters. For instance, clustering for typical response clusters, regression for normal future states estimation and measuring the distance between forecast and actual measurements, | ||
+ | ====== | ||
+ | * **Understanding of system dynamics**, where the system owner is interested in having insightful information on the system functioning to make good decisions on its control or further development. Typical applications | ||
- | In the context of IoT systems, there might be several reasons why time series analysis is needed. The most widely ones are the following: | ||
+ | While most of the methods covered here might be employed in time series analysis, this chapter outlines anomaly detection and classification cases through an industrial cooling system example. | ||
- | * **Process dynamics forecasting** for higher-performing decision support systems. An IoT system, coupled with appropriate cloud computing or other computing infrastructure, | + | ===== A cooling |
- | * **Anomaly detection** is one of the highly valued features of IoT systems. In its essence, anomaly detection is a set of methods enabling the recognition of unwanted or abnormal behaviour of the system over a specific time period. Anomalies might be expressed in data differently: | + | |
- | * **A certain event in time:** for instance, a measurement jumps over a defined threshold value. This is the simplest type of anomaly, and most of the control systems cope with it by setting appropriate threshold values and alerting mechanisms; | + | |
- | * **Change of a data fragment shape:** this might happen to technical systems, where a typical response to control inputs has changed to some shape that is not anticipated or planned. A simple example is an engine’s response to turning it on and reaching typical rpm values. Due to overloads, wearing out mechanics or other reasons, the response might take too long, signalling that the device has to be repaired. | + | |
- | * **Event density:** In many technical systems, their behaviour is seasonal–cyclic. Changes in the periods and their absolute values, or their response shapes within the period, are excellent predictors of current or future malfunctioning. So, recognition of typical period shapes and response shapes in time are of high value for predictive maintenance, | + | |
- | * **Event value distribution: | + | |
- | == Level 5 Headline | + | |
- | * Due to its diversity, a wide range of algorithms might be used in anomaly detection, including those that have been covered in previous chapters. For instance, clustering for typical response clusters, regression for normal | + | A given industrial cooling system has to maintain a specific temperature mode of around -18C. Due to the specifics of the technology, it goes through |
- | * **Understanding of system dynamics**, where the system owner is interested | + | |
+ | <figure Cooling_system> | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
- | < | + | It is easy to notice that there are two standard behaviour patterns: defrost (small spikes), temperature maintenance (data between spikes) and one anomaly – the high spike. |
- | {{ : | + | |
- | < | + | One possible alternative for building a classification model is to use K-nearest neighbours (KNN). Whenever a new data fragment is collected, it is compared to the closest ones and applies a majority principle to determine its class. In this example, three behaviour patterns are recognised; therefore, a sample collection must be composed for each pattern. It might be done by hand since, in this case, the time series is relatively short. |
+ | |||
+ | Examples of the collected patterns (defrost on the left and temperature maintenance on the right) are present in figure {{ref> | ||
+ | |||
+ | < | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
</ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | Unfortunately, | ||
+ | |||
+ | <figure Anomaly_pattern> | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | A data augmentation technique might be applied to overcome data scarcity, where several other samples are produced from the given data sample. This is done by applying Gaussian noise and randomly changing the sample' | ||
+ | |||
+ | <figure Data_collection> | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | One might notice that: | ||
+ | * Samples of different patterns are different in length. | ||
+ | * Samples of the same pattern are of different lengths. | ||
+ | * The interesting phenomena (spikes) are located at different locations within the samples and are slightly different. | ||
+ | The abovementioned issues expose the problem of calculating distances from one example to another since comparing data points will produce misleading distance values. To avoid it, a Dynamic Time Warping | ||
+ | |||
+ | Once the distance metric is selected and the initial dataset is produced, the KNN might be implemented. The closest ones can be determined using DTW by providing the " | ||
+ | |||
+ | <figure Single_query> | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | For practical implementation, | ||
+ | |||
+ | <figure Multiple_test_queries> | ||
+ | {{ : | ||
+ | < | ||
+ | </ | ||
+ | |||
+ | As might be noticed, the query (black) samples are somewhat different from the ones found to be " | ||
+ | The same idea demonstrated here might be used for unknown anomalies by setting a similarity threshold for DTW, classifying known anomalies as shown here, or even simple forecasting. | ||
+ |