MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987557466 · doi:10.2118/197695-ms

Advanced Production Plant Optimization with AI

2019· article· en· W2987557466 on OpenAlexaff
Jayant Kalagnanam, Dariusz Piotrowski, Pavankumar Murali, Dharmashankar Subrahmanian, Joe Zhou, Claire Ma, Giovane Silva, Jacqueline Williams, Crystal Liu, Adnan Haider, P A Rahman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Plan (archaeology)ThroughputComputer scienceProcess (computing)Set (abstract data type)Time horizonPoint (geometry)CognitionDynamic programmingOperations researchIndustrial engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematical optimizationEngineeringAlgorithmMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Managing the dynamic behavioral changes of a production plant process to keep to a production plan is a challenge and requires the ability to predict the dynamic behavior of processes and alter any controls, as needed, to adhere as closely as possible to the plan. This paper presents a novel solution (called Cognitive Plant Advisor) based on the use of advanced machine learning to learn complex dynamics from sensor data coupled with mathematical programming to optimize the operations of a production plant. The Cognitive Plant Advisor provides set point recommedations for a 12-72 hour horizon to (i) improve throughput, or (ii) provide optimal recovery plan for a disruption. This advisory system has the potential to improve throughput by upto 1% of total production.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207