Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work considers the problem of designing an active fault‐isolation scheme for nonlinear process systems subject to uncertainty. The faults under consideration include bounded actuator faults and process disturbances. The key idea of the proposed method is to exploit the nonlinear way that faults affect the process evolution through supervisory feedback control. To this end, a dedicated fault‐isolation residual and its time‐varying threshold are generated for each fault by treating other faults as disturbances. A fault is isolated when the corresponding residual breaches its threshold. These residuals, however, may not be sensitive to faults in the operating region under nominal operation. To make these residuals sensitive to faults, a switching rule is designed to drive the process states, upon detection of a fault, to move toward an operating point that, for any given fault, results in the reduction of the effect of other faults on the evolution of the same process state. This idea is then generalized to sequentially operate the process at multiple operating points that facilitate isolation of different faults for the case where the residuals are not simultaneously sensitive to faults at a single operating point. The effectiveness of the proposed active fault‐isolation scheme is illustrated using a chemical reactor example and demonstrated through application to a solution copolymerization of methyl methacrylate and vinyl acetate. © 2013 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 59: 2435–2453, 2013
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".