MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2629820564 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22927

The utilization of closed‐loop prediction for dynamic real‐time optimization

2017· article· en· W2629820564 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsKarush–Kuhn–Tucker conditionsMathematical optimizationProcess (computing)Dynamic programmingComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Quadratic programmingOptimization problemDimension (graph theory)Model predictive controlSet (abstract data type)Controller (irrigation)Complementarity (molecular biology)MathematicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real‐time optimization (RTO) is a layer within the hierarchical process automation architecture in which economically optimal set‐points are computed for the underlying plant control system. RTO calculations are traditionally based on steady‐state models, but an increasingly global and dynamic marketplace has led to the development of dynamic RTO (DRTO) strategies. Typical DRTO approaches optimize process input trajectories based on the open‐loop response dynamics of the process, with controller set‐point trajectories constructed from the resulting output response. This paper describes recent developments that utilize closed‐loop prediction in the DRTO calculations for MPC regulated processes. A rigorous closed‐loop DRTO problem is formulated as a multilevel dynamic optimization problem due to the inclusion of a sequence of MPC quadratic programming subproblems to generate the closed‐loop response dynamics. A simultaneous solution strategy is applied in which the MPC subproblems are replaced by their equivalent Karush‐Kuhn‐Tucker (KKT) optimality conditions, permitting reformulation of the original problem as a single‐level mathematical program with complementarity constraints (MPCC). Closed‐loop approximation techniques are proposed to reduce the dimension of the DRTO problem while maintaining good closed‐loop prediction accuracy. The performance of the proposed approaches is illustrated using case studies. Conclusions are drawn, and further research directions identified.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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