MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285492119 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24553

Layered monitoring of xylenol tail gas treatment process based on stationary subspace analysis

2022· article· en· W4285492119 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Feihong Xu, Xiaoli Luan, Fei Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSubspace topologySliding window protocolStationary processComputer sciencePrincipal component analysisProcess (computing)Data miningMathematicsArtificial intelligenceWindow (computing)Statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To deal with the inaccurate monitoring caused by the non‐stationary characteristics of the xylenol tail gas treatment process, a layered monitoring scenario utilizing stationary subspace analysis has been presented in the present study. First, principal component analysis (PCA) is applied to establish the upper‐level stationary monitoring model. Then the sliding time window is used to capture the dynamic information of the remaining non‐stationary features, update the model, and establish the lower non‐stationary monitoring model. Next, the Bayesian information criterion is employed to build the global monitoring model according to the detection results of the upper and lower layers. Finally, the industrial data collected from the industrial boiler is used to evaluate the effectiveness and applicability of the proposed method. It is demonstrated that layered monitoring has higher accuracy than conventional non‐stationary process monitoring techniques. Moreover, it can capture the faults in the stationary features masked by the non‐stationary features.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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