Signed directed graph based modeling and its validation from process knowledge and process data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Signed directed graph based modeling and its validation from process knowledge and process data This paper is concerned with the fusion of information from process data and process connectivity and its subsequent use in fault diagnosis and process hazard assessment. The Signed Directed Graph (SDG), as a graphical model for capturing process topology and connectivity to show the causal relationships between process variables by material and information paths, has been widely used in root cause and hazard propagation analysis. An SDG is usually built based on process knowledge as described by piping and instrumentation diagrams. This is a complex and experience-dependent task, and therefore the resulting SDG should be validated by process data before being used for analysis. This paper introduces two validation methods. One is based on cross-correlation analysis of process data with assumed time delays, while the other is based on transfer entropy, where the correlation coefficient between two variables or the information transfer from one variable to another can be computed to validate the corresponding paths in SDGs. In addition to this, the relationship captured by data-based methods should also be validated by process knowledge to confirm its causality. This knowledge can be realized by checking the reachability or the influence of one variable on another based on the corresponding SDG which is the basis of causality. A case study of an industrial process is presented to illustrate the application of the proposed methods.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it