MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W316638995 · doi:10.1287/opre.1070.0495

Multivariate Bayesian Control Chart

2008· article· en· W316638995 on OpenAlexaff
Viliam Makiš

Bibliographic record

VenueOperations Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl chartEWMA chartControl limitsUnivariateCUSUMBayesian probabilityMultivariate statisticsStatistical process controlStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceEconometricsProcess (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multivariate Bayesian control chart for monitoring process mean under the assumption that the vector of process observations follows a multivariate normal distribution is considered. Traditional control charts such as Hotelling's T 2 , EWMA, and CUSUM charts have been applied to control industrial processes characterized by several measurable variables. It is well known that these traditional, non-Bayesian process control techniques are not optimal, but very few results regarding the structure of the Bayesian control policy have been reported in the literature, all dealing with the univariate, finite-horizon case. In this paper, we formulate the multivariate Bayesian process control problem in the optimal stopping framework. The objective is to find a stopping rule under partial observations, minimizing the long-run expected average cost per unit time for a given sample size and sampling interval. Under standard operating and cost assumptions, it is proved that a control limit policy is optimal, and an algorithm is presented to find the optimal control limit and the minimum average cost.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.458
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.115 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOperations ResearchSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207