MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017628601 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23767

Heats and input variables selection for designing a water detection framework applicable to industrial electric arc furnaces

2020· article· en· W3017628601 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hamzah Alshawarghi, Ali Elkamel, Behzad Moshiri, Farzad Hourfar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatent variableElectric arc furnaceComputer scienceFeature selectionSelection (genetic algorithm)Electric arcPreprocessorSteelmakingProcess engineeringMachine learningArtificial intelligenceEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the development of “heats” and input variables selection models that are incorporated into a water detection framework for an industrial steelmaking electric arc furnace (EAF). The selection models in this work are developed based on latent variable methods. The latent variable methods used in this work are multiway principal component analysis (MPCA) and multiway projection to latent structures (MPLS). The particular problems related to latent variable methods discussed in this paper include data preprocessing, including alignment, unfolding method, centering, and scaling. The outcome of the heats selection model is heats with normal operation and the outcome of the input variables selection model is variables that are highly correlated with the off‐gas water vapour. The water detection framework and developed models are useful in practical settings for the prediction of water leakage and the design of appropriate fault detection and diagnosis strategies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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