MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020941819 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23778

Density peaks clustering‐based steady/transition mode identification and monitoring of multimode processes

2020· article· en· W3020941819 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Zheng, Yang Wang, Haolan Yan, Yan Wang, Weidong Yang, Bo Tao

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hubei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMulti-mode optical fiberCluster analysisBenchmark (surveying)Mode (computer interface)Constraint (computer-aided design)Process (computing)AlgorithmCluster (spacecraft)Computer scienceSample (material)Data miningEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsMechanical engineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multimode is the characteristic of industrial manufacturing processes due to different production strategies and environments. For multimode process monitoring, it is a challenge to identify different steady modes and transition modes. In this paper, a k nearest neighbours (KNN)‐based density peaks clustering (DPC) method is applied to identify different modes. First, the local density of each sample, which is obtained with a KNN constraint and its minimum distance to the higher local density points are calculated as two indicators of the DPC algorithm to find the cluster centres of the training data. Then, the transition modes are identified by combining the moving window strategy and the DPC algorithm, where an index called the local density‐distance ratio (LDDR) is employed. Finally, the monitoring algorithm is used to detect the faults for each operation mode. The effectiveness and advantages of the proposed method are illustrated by a numerical example and a Tennessee Eastman (TE) benchmark process.

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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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