MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607855551 · doi:10.1109/tac.2017.2696740

Iterative Residual Generator for Fault Detection With Linear Time-Invariant State–Space Models

2017· article· en· W2607855551 on OpenAlexafffund
Shunyi Zhao, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)ResidualFault detection and isolationKalman filterMathematicsFalse alarmFinite impulse responseAlgorithmComputer scienceActuatorStatisticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, an iterative residual generator (IRG) is proposed for discrete time-invariant state-space model with the aim of detecting faulty signals. By minimizing the mean square errors subject to unbiasedness constraint, a new filter with finite impulse response structure is derived. The resulting IRG is then obtained by extracting residual signal from the batch filter through several predictor/corrector iterations. It shows that IRG can provide a zero-mean Gaussian process regardless of previous estimation errors. More importantly, it includes the residual generation process in the Kalman filter as its special case. With the chi-square test, a numerical example is simulated to demonstrate that IRG can reduce the false alarm significantly compared with the traditional recursive strategy in the presence of actuator or sensor faults, and the estimation horizon length in IRG serves as a tuning parameter providing a tradeoff between the missed alarm and false alarm.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207