Feature learning based on entropy estimation density peak clustering and stacked autoencoder for industrial process monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Recently, stacked autoencoder (SAE)‐based deep learning has been widely employed for industrial process fault detection, which can extract representative low‐dimensional features. However, SAE fails to take the distribution structure of raw data into consideration in the unsupervised self‐reconstruction learning, and this may lead to limited monitoring performance. Focusing on this issue, this paper proposes a new fault detection method based on entropy estimation density peak clustering and stacked autoencoder (EEDPC‐SAE) for industrial process monitoring. First, an improved automatic clustering algorithm, namely, entropy estimation density peak clustering (EEDPC), is presented to analyze the distribution structure of process data. Then, the data distribution information is integrated into the learning procedure of SAE to capture the data intrinsic structure. EEDPC‐SAE can describe the distribution characteristics of process data, and more informative high‐level features can be learned for fault detection. Finally, two statistics, that is, Hotelling'sT‐squared () and squared prediction error (SPE), are established based on the encoder features and residual features generated by EEDPC‐SAE. The effectiveness of the proposed method is evaluated by the Tennessee Eastman (TE) process and fed‐batch fermentation penicillin (FBFP) 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".