In this paper, the axioms of Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) pre- sented by Worden, Farrar, Manson, and Park [2007] are discussed in detail. In many cases, the intent of the axioms is found to be correct, but the terminologies used are confusing. Also, it was found that some axioms could be derived from other axioms that were given in that paper itself. Based on the discussion presented in this paper, it is suggested to replace the seven axioms given in ibid with a set of three new axioms. The main plus point of the axioms given in the paper over those given in ibid is conciseness. Counter-examples are presented to dispute the axioms where necessary. Similar to Worden et al. [2007], the term axiom is used outside its meaning in the field of mathematics and logic. In ibid, the term axiom is stated to refer to the fundamental truth which have not been contra- dicted in the field of SHM. However, in this paper, the word axiom refers to its second meaning in Merriam Webster dictionary “am established rule or principle or self evident truth.” Keywords— Structural Health Monitoring, Axioms, Damage, Unified Frame- work, Definitions 1 INTRODUCTION - STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING The field of Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) was developed due to the need of non-destructive inspection methods to detect damages in structures that are used to bear large loads, and repeated or cyclic loading. Prior to the perturba- tion techniques currently being used and research in Structural Health Monitor- ing, structures were often inspected for damages using (Non-Destructive Eval- uation) NDE methods and techniques such as x-ray observations, eddy current techniques, ultrasonic techniques or thermography. These techniques, however, were not the most practical due to certain disadvantages such as being labor intensive. Additionally, in many cases the techniques are only useful to detect 1 damages in critical regions where the potential for damage growth and struc- tural failure is very high. As such, it was necessary to develop new damage detection methods which were less labor intensive and could scan the entire structure. In many structures, such as aerospace vehicles, the structure is dy- namically excited and it is believed that the response of a structure to excitation varies with the presence of damages because damage causes changes in stiffness and response is a function of stiffness. Consequentially, the goal of SHM is to use the differences in the structure’s responses to detect damages, to identify the locations of damages, and to determine the magnitude and orientations of the damage. The eventual goal of SHM is to predict the remaining life of a damaged structure. 2 LITERATURE SURVEY - STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING The literature for vibration based SHM can be divided into two aspects, the first wherein models are proposed for the damage to determine the dynamic charac- teristics, also known as the direct problem, and the second, wherein the dynamic characteristics are used to determine damage characteristics, also known as the inverse problem Friswell and E. [2001] . In the literature, reviews in particular, for most cases both aspects are tack- led together. Doebling et al. [1998], which stems from a report submitted by the same authors to the Los Alamos National Laboratory Doebling et al. [1996], mainly addresses the inverse problem. The work by Dimarogonas [1996] gives a survey of literature that deals with vibrations based SHM. The review paper primarily deals with the direct problem in the modeling of damage, but it also deals with the inverse problem of damage identification to a limited extent. The review is exhaustive, for pre-1996 literature, as far as enumerating methods to model cracks. Both the above reviews can safely be recommended to any researcher in- tending to understand the origins of SHM for their respective merits. However, both of them are old and the field of SHM has proceeded since. The next useful review for vibration based SHM is by a team at Los Alamos research laboratory Sohn et al. [2003]. The bulky document has over 300 pages and is an exhaustive literature review of an important phase of the field of SHM, i.e. from 1996 to 2001. Staszewski et al. [2004] present a collection of papers written by experts in the field. The papers are arranged randomly. The next review of interest is by Carden and Fanning [2004]. There are two other reviews that are focused on specific aspects of the inverse problem of SHM. The first is byMontalvao et al. [2006] and deals with composites, and the second is by Ciang and Lee [2008] and deals with wind turbine systems. A review by Fan and Qiao [2010] specifically focuses on modal parameter based damage diagnosis, while Riggio and Dilmaghani [2020] timber structural health monitoring (SHM) projects. 2 Another review article by [Sony et al., 2019] presents a literature survey of the applications of smartphones, UAVs, cameras, and robotic sensors used in acquiring and analyzing the vibration data for structural condition monitoring and maintenance. The latest review paper that the author came across is by Gharehbaghi et al. [Gharehbaghi et al., 2022]. 3 INTRODUCTION TO THIS PAPER The last paper that was cited in the previous section that of [Gharehbaghi et al., 2022] has about 10 authors and 240