MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949489300 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23559

Distributed process monitoring framework based on decomposed modified partial least squares

2019· article· en· W2949489300 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mengyu Rong, Hongbo Shi, Fan Wang, Shuai Tan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPartial least squares regressionProcess (computing)Computer scienceBlock (permutation group theory)Scale (ratio)Data miningFault detection and isolationAlgorithmMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing complexity of industrial processes, the scale of production processes tends to be large. The significant amount of measurement data in large‐scale processes poses challenges in data collection, management, and storage. In order to perform effective process monitoring in large‐scale processes, the distributed process monitoring strategy is widely applied. Meanwhile, product quality is an important indicator for industrial production. Therefore, a novel quality‐based distributed process monitoring scheme is proposed. Firstly, the Girvan‐Newman (GN) algorithm in complex network divides process variables into multiple sub‐blocks. Secondly, greedy algorithm‐based high‐dimensional mutual information (HDMI) is used to extract quality‐related variables in each sub‐block, through which the irrelevant and redundant variables are eliminated. Thirdly, the decomposed modified partial least squares (DMPLS) approach is used to detect whether a fault is quality‐related or not in each sub‐block. Finally, the Bayesian inference strategy is adopted to combine the detection results of all sub‐blocks. The effectiveness of the distributed DMPLS approach is illustrated through a numerical simulation and the Tennessee Eastman (TE) process. The results show the superiority of our proposed monitoring scheme.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207