MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017353054 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23763

Enhanced high‐order information extraction for multiphase batch process fault monitoring

2020· article· en· W3017353054 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ding Chunhao, Chang Peng, Olivia Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)Fault detection and isolationFault (geology)Data miningFlexibility (engineering)Independent component analysisExtraction (chemistry)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Conventional independent component analysis (ICA) monitoring methods extract the feature information of process data by selecting more important independent components (ICs), which discard a small part of ICs that may contain useful information for faults, leading to unsatisfactory monitoring results. However, when the number of sampling points is greater than that of process variables, the ICA monitoring model does not work well. To address the aforementioned problems, a novel monitoring method, multiphase enhanced high‐order information extraction (MEHOIE), is proposed in this paper. The entire production process was first divided into several steady phases and transition phases by the affinity propagation (AP) phase partitioning method. The enhanced high‐order information extraction (EHOIE) model was then built in each phase for fault monitoring. Finally, the algorithm was applied in the penicillin simulation platform and industrial microbial pharmaceutical process. The flexibility and superiority of this algorithm were verified by comparing it with other conventional methods.

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)0.000
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 score0.207
Threshold uncertainty score0.384

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207