Selection Process:

The best paper nominees were recommended by reviewers, review manager, or associate review directors based on review scores and comments. Then, these papers were reviewed by the best paper selection committee in a double blind manner (names and affiliations of the authors were removed from manuscripts). The papers were scored for a set of criteria such as Content, Significance, Technical validity, Innovation, Writing style, Accuracy, Clarity, Simplicity, and Readability. The scores from reviewers were aggregated to get the final score and the paper that scored highest in each category is selected as the best paper.

The nominees and winners of the best paper awards for PHM14 are:

• [Winner – Best Application Paper]
  An Aircraft Lifecycle Approach for the Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prognostics and Condition-based Maintenance based on Discrete-Event Simulation
  Nico B. Hölzel¹, Thomas Schilling², Volker Gollnick³–
  ^1,2,3 DLR – German Aerospace Center, Air Transportation Systems, Hamburg, 21079, Germany
• [Winner – Best Theory Paper]
  Fault Diagnosis and Prognosis Based on Lebesgue Sampling
  Bin Zhang¹, Xiaofeng Wang²–
  ^1,2 Department of Electrical Engineering, University of South Carolina, Columbia SC, USA
• Multiple-imputation-particle-filtering scheme for Uncertainty Characterization in Battery State-of-Charge Estimation Problems with Missing Measurement Data
  David E. Acuña¹, Marcos E. Orchard², Jorge F. Silva³, Aramis Pérez⁴–
  ^1,2,3,4 Universidad de Chile, Department of Electrical Engineering. Av. Tupper 2007, Santiago, Chile
• On the Use of Particle Flow to Enhance the Computational Performance of Particle-Filtering-based Prognostics
  Javier A. Oliva¹, Torsten Bertram²–
  ^1,2 Institute of Control Theory and Systems Engineering, Technische Universität Dortmund, Germany
• A Vibration-Based Approach for Stator Winding Fault Diagnosis of Induction Motors: Application of Envelope Analysis
  Chao Jin¹, Agusmian P. Ompusunggu², Zongchang Liu³, Hossein D. Ardakani⁴, Fredrik Petré⁵, Jay Lee⁶–
  ^1,3,4,6 NSF I/UCRC Center for Intelligent Maintenance Systems (IMS), Cincinnati, OH, 45221,USA
  ^2,5 Flanders’ Mechatronics Technology Centre (FMTC), Heverlee, 3001, Belgium
• Validation of Model-Based Prognostics for Pneumatic Valves in a Demonstration Testbed
  Chetan S. Kulkarni¹, Matthew Daigle², George Gorospe³, Kai Goebel⁴–
  ^1,3 SGT, Inc., NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA
  ^2,4 NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA
• Uncertainty in Steady-State Diagnostics of a Current-Pressure Transducer: How Confident are We in Diagnosing Faults?
  Shankar Sankararaman¹, Christopher Teubert², Kai Goebel³–
  ^1,2 SGT Inc., NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA
  ³ NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, USA