MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102384358 · doi:10.1002/aic.14866

Nonlinear process identification in the presence of multiple correlated hidden scheduling variables with missing data

2015· article· en· W2102384358 on OpenAlexafffund
Lei Chen, Shima Khatibisepehr, Biao Huang, Fei Liu, Yongsheng Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsMissing dataComputer scienceWeightingSmoothingNonlinear systemScheduling (production processes)ComputationGeneralityAlgorithmMaximizationMathematical optimizationMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification of nonlinear processes in the presence of noise corrupted and correlated multiple scheduling variables with missing data is concerned. The dynamics of the hidden scheduling variables are represented by a state‐space model with unknown parameters. To assure generality, it is assumed that the multiple correlated scheduling variables are corrupted with unknown disturbances and the identification dataset is incomplete with missing data. A multiple model approach is proposed to formulate the identification problem of nonlinear systems under the framework of the expectation‐maximization algorithm. The parameters of the local process models and scheduling variable models as well as the hyperparameters of the weighting function are simultaneously estimated. The particle smoothing technique is adopted to handle the computation of expectation functions. The efficiency of the proposed method is demonstrated through several simulated examples. Through an experimental study on a pilot‐scale multitank system, the practical advantages are further illustrated. © 2015 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 61: 3270–3287, 2015

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207