MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967570267 · doi:10.1016/j.softx.2019.100309

Auxiliary codes for fault prognosis of Tennessee Eastman process using a hybrid model (CPL1.0)

2019· article· en· W2967570267 on OpenAlexafffund
Mihiran Galagedarage Don, Faisal Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftwareX · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsComputer scienceHidden Markov modelToolboxComponent (thermodynamics)MATLABProcess (computing)Fault (geology)Bayesian networkCode (set theory)Source codeFocus (optics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CPL1.0 is a Matlab code which can generate fault predictions of Tennessee Eastman (TE) process, based on the open-source toolbox developed by Kevin Murphy in 2005. It facilitates the calculation of Prior Probabilities (PP), Conditional Probabilities (CP), and Likelihood Evidence (LE). These are essential features required for fault prognosis purpose using Hidden Markov Model (HMM) and Bayesian Network (BN) hybrid model. Determination of the CP, PP, and LE is the most time-consuming component in the aforementioned process. The proposed code has the potential to drastically reduce the repetitive computation time thus enabling the researcher to focus on the main goal-oriented outcome. CPL1.0 is implemented as a facilitator to communicate between BN and the HMM in a hybrid fault prediction and prognosis system. The hybrid system can predict ten out of ten selected faults and can accurately prognose eight out of the ten faults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.010

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftwareXSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207