MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969635534 · doi:10.1109/icinfa.2012.6246863

On correlation analysis of bivariate alarm signals

2012· article· en· W1969635534 on OpenAlexaff
Zijiang Yang, Jiandong Wang, Tongwen Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivariate analysisCorrelationSimilarity (geometry)Correlation coefficientALARMCorrelation ratioStatisticsMathematicsFalse alarmPattern recognition (psychology)Pearson product-moment correlation coefficientComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the correlation analysis for bivariate alarm signals in order to indicate whether two alarm signals are correlated, and their cause-effect direction if they are correlated. First, seven similarity coefficients are selected as the similarity measurements for binary data, in consideration of specialities of alarm signals. The upper bounds of these similarity coefficients are theoretically established for two independent alarm signals. Second, the distribution of a so-called correlation delay is shown to be indispensable and effective for the correlation analysis. Finally, a novel correlation analysis method for alarm signals is proposed based on the correlation ratio coefficient and distribution of the correlation delay. An industrial case study is provided to illustrate the proposed correlation analysis method.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207