MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582860853 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.6b01916

Root Cause Diagnosis of Process Fault Using KPCA and Bayesian Network

2017· article· en· W2582860853 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRoot cause analysisComputer scienceBayesian networkRoot causeFault detection and isolationProcess (computing)Data miningFault (geology)Artificial intelligenceKernel principal component analysisMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Reliability engineeringEngineeringKernel methodSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops a methodology to combine diagnostic information from various fault detection and isolation tools to diagnose the true root cause of an abnormal event in industrial processes. Limited diagnostic information from kernel principal component analysis, other online fault detection and diagnostic tools, and process knowledge were combined through Bayesian belief network. The proposed methodology will enable an operator to diagnose the root cause of the abnormality. Further, some challenges on application of Bayesian network on process fault diagnosis such as network connection determination, estimation of conditional probabilities, and cyclic loop handling were addressed. The proposed methodology was applied to Fluid Catalytic Cracking unit and Tennessee Eastman Chemical Process. In both cases, the proposed approach showed a good capability of diagnosing the root cause of abnormal conditions.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.261 · 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