A convolutional neural network ( <scp>CNN</scp> )‐based direct method to detect stiction in control valves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Control valves are considered important capital assets in any process industry. A properly maintained control valve can have a significant impact on how well the process is controlled as well as the overall cost of the plant. However, control valves can suffer from poor control performance due to valve non‐linearities. One of the main reasons for non‐linearity is control valve stiction. Stiction not only causes oscillations in the process variables but also shortens the life of the control valve, resulting in an economic loss for the process. In a process plant, a control engineer generally analyzes the time series plot of process value (PV), set point (SP), and controller output (OP) data and identifies stiction based on the typical shape pattern of PV/SP/OP plot. In this study, the same shape pattern methodology is adapted to identify stiction using convolutional neural network (CNN) technique. A one‐dimensional convolution neural network (Conv1D) algorithm is developed, which works directly on PV/SP/OP time series data for stiction detection. The proposed CNN algorithm is tested on both simulated and industrial control loop data. The suggested method provides promising results with a combined stiction prediction accuracy of 92% (92.2% in predicting non‐sticky and 91.53% in predicting sticky loops) for the industrial loops data studied.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".