MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of the Suitability of Different Chiller Performance Models for On-Line Training Applied to Automated Fault Detection and Diagnosis (RP-1139)

2003· article· en· W2010704097 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T. Agami Reddy, Dagmar Niebur, Klaus Kaae Andersen, Paolo P. Pericolo, Gaspar Cabrera

Bibliographic record

VenueHVAC&R Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDrexel UniversityTexas A and M University
KeywordsChillerComputer scienceArtificial neural networkLine (geometry)Radial basis functionFault (geology)PerceptronPolynomialEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the research results of comparing the suitability of four different chiller performance models to be used for on-line automated fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) of vapor-compression chillers. The models were limited to steady-state performance and included (a) black-box multivariate polynomial (MP) models; (b) artificial neural network (ANN) models, specifically radial basis function (RBF) and multilayer perceptron (MLP); (c) the generic physical component (PC) model approach; and (d) the lumped physical Gordon-Ng (GN) model. All models except for (b) are linear in the parameters. A review of the engineering literature identified the three following on-line training schemes as suitable for evaluation: ordinary recursive least squares (ORLS) under incremental window scheme, sliding window scheme, and weighted recursive least squares (WRLS) scheme, where more weight is given to newer data. The evaluation was done based on five months of data from a 220 ton field-operated chiller from Toronto (a data set of 810 data points) and fourteen days of data from a 450 ton field-operated chiller (a set of about 1120 data points) located on Drexel University campus. The evaluation included a preliminary off-line or batch analysis to gain a first understanding of the suitability of the various models and their particular drawbacks and then to investigate whether the different chiller models exhibit any time variant or seasonal behavior. The subsequent on-line evaluation consisted of assessing the various models in terms of their suitability for model parameter tracking as well as model prediction accuracy (which would provide the necessary thresholds for flagging occurrence of faults). The former assessment suggested that parameter tracking using the GN model parameters could be a viable option for fault detection (FD) implementation, while the black box models were not at all suitable given their high standard errors. The assessment of models in terms of their internal prediction accuracy revealed that the MLP model was best, followed by the MP and GN models. However, the more important test of external predictive accuracy suggests that all models are equally accurate (CV about 2% to 4%) and, hence, comparable within the experimental uncertainty of the data. ORLS with incremental window scheme was found to be the most robust compared to the other computational schemes. The chiller models do not exhibit any time variant behavior since WRLS was found to be poorest. Finally, in terms of the initial length of training data, it was determined—at least with the data sets used that exhibited high autocorrelation—that about 320 and 400 data points would be respectively necessary for the MP and GN model parameter estimates to stabilize at their long-term values. This paper also provides a detailed discussion of the potential advantages that on-line model training can offer and identifies areas of follow-up research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations42
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHVAC&R ResearchSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207