Design and assessment of delay timer alarm systems for nonlinear chemical processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".