MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091076315 · doi:10.1109/tcst.2020.3025610

A Holistic Probabilistic Framework for Monitoring Nonstationary Dynamic Industrial Processes

2020· article· en· W3091076315 on OpenAlexafffund
David R. Scott, Chao Shang, Biao Huang, Dexian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoregressive modelProbabilistic logicComputer scienceProcess (computing)MaximizationRange (aeronautics)Feature (linguistics)Stationary processData miningMachine learningIndustrial engineeringArtificial intelligenceEconometricsMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multivariate statistical process monitoring (MSPM) methods provide sensitive indicators of process conditions by harnessing the value of massive process data. Large-scale industrial processes are subject to wide-range time-varying operating conditions such that some variables inevitably exhibit nonstationary behavior, which poses significant challenges for the design of MSPM schemes. In this brief, a novel nonstationary probabilistic slow feature analysis algorithm is developed to comprehensively describe both nonstationary and stationary variations that underlie process measurements during routine operations. For efficient parameter estimation, the expectation-maximization algorithm is employed. By modeling nonstationarity and stationarity as the random walk and stable autoregressive processes, interpretable monitoring statistics are constructed to detect abnormality in nonstationary dynamics, stationary dynamics, and stationary steady conditions. This forms a holistic and pragmatic monitoring framework for industrial processes, which is beneficial for reducing false alarms and providing meaningful operational information for industrial practitioners. The efficacy of the proposed monitoring framework is validated via two case studies.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 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

Citations41
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Control Systems TechnologySame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207