MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine learning algorithms for classification of boiler faults using a simulated dataset

2019· article· en· W2981613498 on OpenAlexaff
Rony Shohet, M.S. Kandil, J.J. McArthur

Bibliographic record

VenueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision treeBoiler (water heating)Random forestNaive Bayes classifierAlgorithmComputer scienceBayesian networkGreenhouse gasMachine learningFault detection and isolationMATLABProject commissioningData miningArtificial intelligenceEngineeringSupport vector machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Building performance has been shown to degrade significantly after commissioning, resulting in increased energy consumption and associated greenhouse gas emissions. Continuous Commissioning using existing sensor networks and IoT devices has the potential to minimize this waste by continually identifying system degradation and revising control strategies to adapt to real building performance. Due to its significant contribution to GHG emissions, building heating, particularly gas boiler systems are critical systems for detecting decreased performance. A review of boiler performance studies has been used to develop a set of common faults and degraded performance conditions, and these have been integrated into a MATLAB Simulink emulator to create a labelled dataset with approximately 27,500 cases for training and testing boiler fault classification models. Classification algorithms such as K-nearest neighbour, Decision tree, Random Forest and Naïve Bayes have been tested and the results show that decision tree methods gave the best prediction (97.8% accuracy) followed by Random forest (95.0%) and KNN for K = 3 (88.1%). Naïve Bayesian and KNN for K = 9 classification both gave poor results.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIOP Conference Series Materials Science and EngineeringSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207