Soft sensor development using artificial intelligence and statistical multivariate methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lack of real-time measurement of certain critical product and process characteristics is a major problem in the manufacturing industry, and it can lead to an out of specification production. A soft sensor is a predictive model that uses readily available process measurements to infer variables that are impossible or difficult to obtain in real-time. In this work, historical process data related to the black liquor recovery circuit from a Canadian kraft pulp and paper mill is used to develop soft sensor models for the black liquor solid content at the concentrator feed. Prior to modeling, irrelevant variables and observations not representative of a normal operating regime are eliminated from the dataset. For practical reasons related to modeling restrictions and soft sensor industrial implementation, is proposed that a limited number of variables be used as model inputs. Two Partial Least Squares-based selection criteria are used to select the most relevant predictors. Two different sets of ten variables are obtained and used to develop Sugeno-type fuzzy logic, neural network and Partial Least Regression models. Their predictive performance is compared in order to determine the best model configuration and input selection method. iii Currently, the black liquor solid content at the concentrator feed is measured once every eight hours, by performing a laboratory analysis. The proposed soft sensor model can be used to provide a real-time value of the solid content, allowing operators to monitor the process and act timely if corrective actions are required.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".