MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806122632 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23249

Survey on the theoretical research and engineering applications of multivariate statistics process monitoring algorithms: 2008–2017

2018· article· en· W2806122632 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 · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersTaishan Scholar Project of Shandong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsViewpointsMultivariate statisticsStatisticsComputer scienceChinaProcess (computing)Operations researchManagement scienceMathematicsEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multivariate statistical process monitoring (MSPM) methods are significant for improving production efficiency and enhancing safety. However, to the authors’ best knowledge, there is no survey paper providing statistics of published papers over the past decade. In this paper, several issues related to MSPM methods are reviewed and studied. First, the annual publication numbers of journal articles concerning MSPM are provided to show the active development of this important research field and to point out several promising directions in the future. Second, the annual numbers of patents are also shown to demonstrate the practicality of different MSPM methods. Particularly, this paper also lists and analyzes the number of MSPM‐related publications in China. The statistics indicate that Chinese researchers and engineers may have different viewpoints from those of other countries, which results in different development trends of MSPM in China.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.257 · 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