Deep Bayesian survival analysis of rail useful lifetime

Reliable estimation of rail useful lifetime can provide valuable information for predictive maintenance in railway systems. However, in most cases, lifetime data is incomplete because not all pieces of rail experience failure by the end of the study horizon, a problem known as censoring. Ignoring or otherwise mistreating the censored cases might lead to false conclusions. Survival approach is particularly designed to handle censored data for analysing the expected duration of time until one event occurs, which is rail failure in this paper. This paper proposes a deep Bayesian survival approach named BNN-Surv to properly handle censored data for rail useful lifetime modelling. The proposed BNN-Surv model applies the deep neural network in the survival approach to capture the non-linear relationship between covariates and rail useful lifetime. To consider and quantify uncertainty in the model, Monte Carlo dropout, regarded as the approximate Bayesian inference, is incorporated into the deep neural network to provide the confidence interval of the estimated lifetime. The proposed approach is implemented on a four-year dataset including track geometry monitoring data, track characteristics data, various types of defect data, and maintenance and replacement (M&R) data collected from a section of railway tracks in Australia. Through extensive evaluation, including Concordance index (C-index) and root mean square error (RMSE) for evaluating model performance, as well as a proposed CW-index for evaluating uncertainty estimations, the effectiveness of the proposed approach is confirmed. The results show that, compared with other commonly used models, the proposed approach can achieve the best concordance index (C-index) of 0.80, and the estimated rail useful lifetimes are closer to real lifetimes. In addition, the proposed approach can provide the confidence interval of the estimated lifetime, with a correct coverage of 81% of the actual lifetime when the confidence interval is 1.38, which is more useful than point estimates in decision-making and maintenance planning of railroad systems.