MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030570659 · doi:10.1021/ie048811p

Iterative Learning Control for Final Batch Product Quality Using Partial Least Squares Models

2005· article· en· W2030570659 on OpenAlexafffund
Jesus Flores‐Cerrillo, John F. MacGregor

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsPartial least squares regressionIterative learning controlLatent variableVariable (mathematics)Computer scienceTrajectoryProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)Mathematical optimizationQuality (philosophy)Least-squares function approximationBatch processingControl theory (sociology)AlgorithmControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A terminal iterative learning control (ILC) strategy for batch-to-batch and within-batch control of final product properties, based on empirical partial least squares (PLS) models, is presented. The strategy rejects persistent process disturbances and achieves new final product quality targets using an iterative procedure that works in the reduced space of a latent variable model rather than in the high dimensional space of the manipulated variable trajectories. Complete manipulated variable trajectory reconstruction is then achieved by exploiting the PLS model of the process. The approach is illustrated with a condensation polymerization example for the production of nylon.

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)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations71
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207