MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734701267 · doi:10.1002/aic.15860

Design and assessment of delay timer alarm systems for nonlinear chemical processes

2017· article· en· W2734701267 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsALARMManual fire alarm activationProcess (computing)Process stateFault detection and isolationTimerNonlinear systemComputer scienceChemical processBenchmark (surveying)Constant false alarm rateEngineeringReliability engineeringReal-time computingAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In process and manufacturing industries, alarm systems play a critical role in ensuring safe and efficient operations. The objective of a standard industrial alarm system is to detect undesirable deviations in process variables as soon as they occur. Fault detection and diagnosis systems often need to be alerted by an industrial alarm system; however, poorly designed alarms often lead to alarm flooding and other undesirable events. In this article, we consider the problem of industrial alarm design for processes represented by stochastic nonlinear time‐series models. The alarm design for such complex processes faces three important challenges: (1) industrial processes exhibit highly nonlinear behavior; (2) state variables are not precisely known (modeling error); and (3) process signals are not necessarily Gaussian, stationary or uncorrelated. In this article, a procedure for designing a delay timer alarm configuration is proposed for the process states. The proposed design is based on minimization of the rate of false and missed alarm rates—two common performance measures for alarm systems. To ensure the alarm design is robust to any non‐stationary process behavior, an expected‐case and a worst‐case alarm designs are proposed. Finally, the efficacy of the proposed alarm design is illustrated on a non‐stationary chemical reactor problem. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 63: 77–90, 2018

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.266 · 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