MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983353144 · doi:10.1002/aic.12358

Bayesian method for multirate data synthesis and model calibration

2010· article· en· W1983353144 on OpenAlexafffund
Xinguang Shao, Biao Huang, Jong Min Lee, Fangwei Xu, Aris Espejo

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsSyncrude (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSyncrude
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Particle filterBayesian probabilityComputer scienceProcess (computing)Monte Carlo methodCalibrationSampling (signal processing)Filter (signal processing)Soft sensorData miningNoise (video)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Data‐driven models are widely used in process industries for monitoring and control purposes. No matter what kind of models one chooses, model‐plant mismatch always exists; it is, therefore, important to implement model update strategies using the latest observation information of the investigated process. In practice, multiple observation sources such as frequent but inaccurate or accurate but infrequent measurements coexist for a same quality variable. In this article, we show how the flexibility of the Bayesian approach can be exploited to account for multiple‐source observations with different degrees of belief. A practical Bayesian fusion formulation with time‐varying variances is proposed to deal with possible abnormal observations. A sequential Monte Carlo sampling based particle filter is used for simultaneously handling systematic and nonsystematic errors (i.e., bias and noise) in the presence of process constraints. The proposed method is illustrated through a simulation example and a data‐driven soft sensor application in an oil sands froth treatment process. © 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J, 57: 1514–1525, 2011

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207