Multimode process monitoring strategy based on improved just‐in‐time‐learning associated with locality preserving projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, a multimode process monitoring strategy based on improved just‐in‐time‐learning associated with locality preserving projections (IJITL‐LPP) is proposed. First, raw data are projected into the feature space using locality preserving projections (LPP). Second, IJITL searches for similar samples of the query sample in the feature space by introducing a variational inference Gaussian mixture model (VIGMM). Finally, the new statistic named average distance is created to complete process monitoring. In the IJITL, the introduced VI can automatically determine the number of modes, thereby accelerating the efficiency of selecting similar samples. In the process monitoring phase, the average distance can reduce the impact of different mode dispersion on fault detection. In addition, LPP can render the model less sensitive to outliers. Compared with principal component analysis (PCA), LPP, K nearest neighbour rules, Gaussian mixture model (GMM), K‐means based‐PCA, and just‐in‐time‐learning (JITL)‐based LPP, the proposed method has better performance in a numerical case, the Tennessee Eastman process, and the semiconductor etching 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".