MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006851924 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.0c00418

Integrating Data-Driven Modeling with First-Principles Knowledge

2020· article· en· W3006851924 on OpenAlexafffund
Nikesh Patel, Jake Nease, Siam Aumi, Christopher M. Ewaschuk, Jie Luo, Prashant Mhaskar

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubspace topologySpurious relationshipComputer scienceSystem identificationIdentification (biology)Nonlinear systemEstimatorProcess (computing)Linear systemConvergence (economics)State (computer science)AlgorithmMathematical optimizationData modelingMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Article addresses the problem of integrating subspace-based model identification with first-principles modeling for handling scenarios where the subspace model identifies spurious relationships between inputs and outputs. The key motivation is to suitably synergize the two approaches while retaining the simplicity of subspace-based model identification. In the proposed methodology, as is done with traditional subspace identification, state trajectories that best describe the input–output data are first computed (which implicitly correspond to an underlying linear time invariant model). In computing the system matrices using the state trajectories, constraints derived from first-principles understanding are incorporated into the optimization problem. To reconcile the resulting mismatch between the state trajectories and the system matrices, an iterative process is utilized. First, the system matrices computed from the optimization problem are utilized to re-estimate the state trajectories (this time utilizing a state estimator and the input and output trajectories). The state trajectories are, in turn, utilized to resolve the system matrices using the input–output data. The process is repeated until convergence occurs between successive state trajectories, thus yielding state trajectories and “consistent” system matrices. The efficacy of the proposed approach is shown via simulations using a nonlinear process example.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.110 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207