Accurate calibration is essential for instruments whose measurements must remain traceable, reliable, and compliant over long operating periods. Fixed-interval programs are easy to administer, but they ignore that instruments drift at different rates under different conditions. This paper studies calibration scheduling as a predictive maintenance problem: given recent sensor histories, estimate time-to-drift (TTD) and intervene before a violation occurs. We adapt the NASA C-MAPSS benchmark into a calibration setting by selecting drift-sensitive sensors, defining virtual calibration thresholds, and inserting synthetic reset events that emulate repeated recalibration. We then compare classical regressors, recurrent and convolutional sequence models, and a compact Transformer for TTD prediction. The Transformer provides the strongest point forecasts on the primary FD001 split and remains competitive on the harder FD002--FD004 splits, while a quantile-based uncertainty model supports conservative scheduling when drift behavior is noisier. Under a violation-aware cost model, predictive scheduling lowers cost relative to reactive and fixed policies, and uncertainty-aware triggers sharply reduce violations when point forecasts are less reliable. The results show that condition-based calibration can be framed as a joint forecasting and decision problem, and that combining sequence models with risk-aware policies is a practical route toward smarter calibration planning.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Calibration-oriented adaptation of C-MAPSS: sensor selection, virtual thresholds, synthetic resets, and TTD labeling.
Fig. 2: Decision flow for the predictive calibration policy.
Model
MAE
RMSE
R2
Linear
18.21
23.73
0.51
Random Forest
17.28
23.15
0.53
XGBoost
16.07
21.80
0.59
LightGBM
15.08
20.44
0.64
LSTM
15.78
21.39
0.60
CNN
19.57
25.66
0.43
TABLE I: Validation Metrics on C-MAPSS-Adapted FD001
Fig. 3: Predicted versus true TTD on FD001 for the Transformer.
Policy
Cal
Viol
Cost
Reactive
289
289
1734
Fixed
417
289
1862
Predictive
743
90
1193
Quantile@10
2386
26
2516
TABLE II: Policy Cost Comparison on FD001
Data
Policy
Cal
Viol
Cost
FD002
Reactive
3902
3902
23412
Fixed
1043
3902
20553
Predictive
6063
2047
16298
Quantile10
28341
152
29101
FD003
Reactive
4805
4805
28830
Fixed
503
4805
24528
TABLE III: Cross-Split Policy Outcomes on C-MAPSS Datasets