MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313572491 · doi:10.1021/ie5002444

Mean Square Error Based Method for Parameter Ranking and Selection To Obtain Accurate Predictions at Specified Operating Conditions

2014· article· en· W2313572491 on OpenAlexafffund
Zahra Eghtesadi, Kimberley B. McAuley

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOverfittingRanking (information retrieval)Mean squared errorMonte Carlo methodComputer scienceModel selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)AlgorithmData setSet (abstract data type)Estimation theoryNonlinear systemComputationMathematical optimizationStatisticsMathematicsMachine learningArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mean-squared-error-based forward selection methodology is proposed for simultaneous parameter ranking and selection based on the critical ratio r CCW [Eghtesadi, Z.; Wu, S.; McAuley, K. B. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52, 12297]. This new technique employs information in the available data set and the operating region of interest to determine the best model with the lowest mean square prediction error. This technique involves relatively simple computations and avoids overfitting of noisy data. This new approach is valuable when data available for parameter estimation arise from correlated experimental designs that make accurate estimation of all the parameters difficult. It is particularly beneficial when the predictions are desired in an operating region that is different from where the data are already available. Monte Carlo simulations of a linear regression example and a nonlinear case study are used to illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed method, demonstrating that results from simulated data agree with theoretical results.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207