MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158544749 · doi:10.1109/acc.2008.4587012

Data-driven Bayesian approach for control loop diagnosis

2008· article· en· W2158544749 on OpenAlexaff
Fei Qi, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Machine learningBayesian probabilityData miningA priori and a posterioriProbabilistic logicMissing dataInferenceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many methods and algorithms have been proposed for control performance monitoring and process monitoring. However, there are few methods available for synthesis of different monitoring algorithms to form a control loop diagnostic system. Determination of the underlying reason of poor control performance is challenging. In this paper, we investigate a novel data-driven Bayesian approach for control loop diagnosis. The new approach can synthesize information from different monitoring techniques to give an appropriate inference even if the performance of each individual monitor may be low. Some other merits of the new approach include, for example, probabilistic inferences which can be easily used by optimal decision making system, robustness to missing data, and ability to incorporate a priori knowledge. Simulation of Bayesian diagnostic system for a binary distillation column is presented. Data missing handling feature using causality structure and marginalization is discussed. Performance of the Bayesian diagnostic system is examined under different operating modes to demonstrate the information synthesizing ability of the proposed approach.

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)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207