Using Artificial Neural Network for Error Reduction in a Nondispersive Thermopile Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The outputs of electronic devices are sensitive to the noise (thermal noise, background noise, etc.) and the change of operating conditions such as temperature or power supply voltage. As a result, the output data may have errors. Theoretically, if these changes are monitored, they can be used to support to correct the errors. The device using three nondispersive thermopiles to detect Fusarium encounters the same problem. The three outputs come from broadband, λ1, and λ2thermopiles. The broadband thermopile works in 1μm to 20μm range; λ1and λ2-thermopiles work in 6.09μm±0.02μm and 9.49μm±0.22μm respectively. One temperature sensor and two voltage-monitoring-modules were installed to monitor the operating conditions of the device. The information from the changes and the background noise of the device are used to train an artificial neural network. The training data are collected under unstable operating conditions. After the training, the trained neural network is used to fix errors in the output data. From the experiments results, the best error ratios of the raw and corrected data, Eraw/Ecorrected, are 23.6, 13.8, and 18.5, respectively. The results were achieved by applying the external training and forcing method. Through the promising results, the technique of using support inputs and artificial neural network to correct data can be applied in any device which encounters similar problem. This method can help to improve accuracy and reliability of the sensor systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".