MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082888367 · doi:10.1080/009864490895990

CLOSED-LOOP DATA RECONCILIATION FOR THE CONTROL OF A BINARY DISTILLATION COLUMN

2005· article· en· W2082888367 on OpenAlexaff
Siliang Bai, Jules Thibault, David D. McLean

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering Communications · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFractionating columnControl theory (sociology)Noise (video)Controller (irrigation)Filter (signal processing)Binary numberProcess (computing)Computer scienceDistillationPID controllerColumn (typography)Data setProcess controlSet (abstract data type)Control (management)Control engineeringMathematicsEngineeringChemistryTemperature controlArtificial intelligenceChromatographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data reconciliation is a procedure that makes use of process models along with process measurements to give more precise and consistent estimates for process variables. Data reconciliation has been traditionally used to provide a more representative set of data to calculate steady-state inventories and process yields. For dynamic systems, the use of data reconciliation is relatively nascent. This article examines the potential use of data reconciliation in closed-loop control as a filter to attenuate the noise in measurements of the controlled variables so that the controllers can access more accurate sets of data. Data reconciliation filters were implemented in simulations of a PID control system for a binary distillation column. Results showed that data reconciliation could efficiently reduce the propagation of measurement noise in control loops, so that the overall performance of the controller is enhanced.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Engineering CommunicationsSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207