MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225130189 · doi:10.1111/rssc.12572

Stopping Time Detection of Wood Panel Compression: A Functional Time-Series Approach

2022· article· en· W4225130189 on OpenAlexaff
Han Lin Shang, Jiguo Cao, Peijun Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooSimon Fraser UniversityBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateComputer scienceSample (material)Series (stratigraphy)AlgorithmStatisticsMathematicsMultivariate statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We consider determining the optimal stopping time for the glue curing of wood panels in an automatic process environment. Using the near-infrared spectroscopy technology to monitor the manufacturing process ensures substantial savings in energy and time. We collect a time-series of curves from a near-infrared spectrum probe consisting of 72 spectra and aim to detect an optimal stopping time. We propose an estimation procedure to determine the optimal stopping time of wood panel compression and the estimation uncertainty associated with the estimated stopping time. Our method first divides the entire data set into a training sample and a testing sample, then iteratively computes integrated squared forecast errors based on the testing sample. We then apply a structural break detection method with one breakpoint to determine an estimated optimal stopping time from a univariate time-series of the integrated squared forecast errors. We also investigate the finite sample performance of the proposed method via a series of simulation 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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C (Applied Statistics)Same topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207