MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1704928189 · doi:10.3384/diss.diva-119445

Troubleshooting Trucks: Automated Planning and Diagnosis

2015· book· en· W1704928189 on OpenAlexaff
Håkan Warnquist

Bibliographic record

VenueLinköping University Electronic Press eBooks · 2015
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsEngineering Link (Canada)
FundersLinköpings Universitet
KeywordsTroubleshootingTruckPlannerComputer scienceListing (finance)Operations researchControl (management)EngineeringReliability engineeringAutomotive engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis considers computer-assisted troubleshooting of heavy vehicles such as trucks and buses.In this setting, the person that is troubleshooting a vehicle problem is assisted by a computer that is capable of listing possible faults that can explain the problem and gives recommendations of which actions to take in order to solve the problem such that the expected cost of restoring the vehicle is low.To achieve this, such a system must be capable of solving two problems: the diagnosis problem of finding which the possible faults are and the decision problem of deciding which action should be taken.The diagnosis problem has been approached using Bayesian network models.Frameworks have been developed for the case when the vehicle is in the workshop only and for remote diagnosis when the vehicle is monitored during longer periods of time.The decision problem has been solved by creating planners that select actions such that the expected cost of repairing the vehicle is minimized.New methods, algorithms, and models have been developed for improving the performance of the planner.The theory developed has been evaluated on models of an auxiliary braking system, a fuel injection system, and an engine temperature control and monitoring system.This work has been supported Scania

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.008

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinköping University Electronic Press eBooksSame topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207