MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1519205603 · doi:10.1109/acc.2015.7172114

Detecting model-plant mismatch without external excitation

2015· article· en· W1519205603 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl Systems and Identification
Canadian institutionsHoneywell (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordssortComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Process (computing)ExcitationClosed loopLoop (graph theory)Process controlControl (management)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Any discrepancy between a process and the associated model used in control design will compromise closed-loop performance. In almost all current techniques to detect model-plant mismatch in model-based control systems there must be some sort of external excitation to overcome the effect of unmeasured disturbances on closed-loop signals. In this paper, we propose a novel technique that enables us to detect model-plant mismatch without introducing any external excitation. We show that model-plant mismatch in a closed loop system changes the cross-correlation coefficients between the model prediction error and the process input at certain lags. Indeed, by comparing the correlation between prediction error and input signals in the case of poor performance with that under good performance, one can detect model-plant mismatch. The results are illustrated on paper machine data.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl Systems and IdentificationFrench-language works237,207