<scp>B</scp>ayesian method for simultaneous gross error detection and data reconciliation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Process measurements collected from daily industrial plant operations are essential for process monitoring, control, and optimization. However, those measurements are generally corrupted by errors, which include gross errors and random errors. Conventionally, those two types of errors were addressed separately by gross error detection and data reconciliation. Solving the simultaneous gross error detection and data reconciliation problem using the hierarchical Bayesian inference technique is focused. The proposed approach solves the following problems in a unified framework. First, it detects which measurements contain gross errors. Second, the magnitudes of the gross errors are estimated. Third, the covariance matrix of the random errors is estimated. Finally, data reconciliation is performed using the maximum a posteriori estimation. The proposed algorithm is applicable to both linear and nonlinear systems. For nonlinear case, the algorithm does not involve any linearization or approximation steps. Numerical case studies are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method. © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J, 61: 3232–3248, 2015
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".