MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993186055 · doi:10.1109/tase.2011.2176490

Performance Assessment and Design for Univariate Alarm Systems Based on FAR, MAR, and AAD

2011· article· en· W1993186055 on OpenAlexaff
Jianwei Xu, Jiandong Wang, Iman Izadi, Tongwen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateALARMComputationConstant false alarm rateComputer scienceFalse alarmReliability engineeringReal-time computingVariable (mathematics)EngineeringAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMultivariate statisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of a univariate alarm system can be assessed in many cases by three indices, namely, the false alarm rate (FAR), missed alarm rate (MAR), and averaged alarm delay (AAD). First, this paper studies the definition and computation of the FAR, MAR, and AAD for the basic mechanism of alarm generation solely based on a trip point, and for the advanced mechanism of alarm generation by exploiting alarm on/off delays. Second, a systematic design of alarm systems is investigated based on the three performance indices and the tradeoffs among them. The computation of FAR, MAR, and AAD and the design of alarm systems require the probability density functions (PDFs) of the univariate process variable in the normal and abnormal conditions. Thus, a new method based on mean change detection is proposed to estimate the two PDFs. Numerical examples and an industrial case study are provided to validate the obtained theoretical results on the FAR, MAR and AAD, and to illustrate the proposed performance assessment and alarm system design procedures.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations116
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207