MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2212265026 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v29i2.19049

Process Diagnosis System (PDS) — A 30 Year History

2015· article· en· W2212265026 on OpenAlexaff
E. Thompson, E. Frolich, J. C. Bellows, B. Bassford, E. Skiko, Mark S. Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSiemens (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiemensExpert systemProcess (computing)SoftwareGas turbinesElectricity generationEngineeringThe RenaissanceSystems engineeringPopularityPower (physics)Computer scienceManufacturing engineeringReliability engineeringElectrical engineeringOperating systemMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PDS (Process Diagnosis System) is an expert system shell developed in the early 1980's. It could handle thousands of sensor inputs and produce thousands of diagnostic messages with confidence factors based on complex logic designed to mimic the thinking of human experts. PDS went into commercial operation in 1985 to monitor seven power plant generators from a centralized diagnostic center at Westinghouse Power Generation headquarters. In the 1990’s the popularity of advanced technology gas turbines provided a renaissance in PDS utilization. The software has undergone rewrites and improvements since its inception, and the current PCPDS now supports the Siemens Power Diagnostics® Center with centralized rule based monitoring of over 1200 gas turbines, steam turbines, and generators.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.006

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207