MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319998557 · doi:10.18280/ria.360619

Faulty Detection System Based on SPC and Machine Learning Techniques

2022· article· en· W4319998557 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed Elamine Benrabah, Ouahab Kadri, Kinza Nadia Mouss, Abdelghani Lakhdari

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceProcess (computing)OutlierQuality (philosophy)Data miningRandom forestControl chartIsolation (microbiology)Product (mathematics)Object (grammar)Statistical process controlKernel (algebra)Artificial intelligenceIndustrial engineeringMachine learningEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting from a worrying observation, that companies have difficulties controlling the anomalies of their manufacturing processes, in order to have a better control over them, we have realized a case study on the practical data of the Fertial Complex to analyze the main parameters of the ammonia neutralization by nitric acid process. This article proposes a precise diagnostic of this process to detect dysfunction problems affecting the final product. We start with a general diagnosis of the process using the SPC method, this approach is considered an excellent way to monitor and improve the product quality and provides very useful observations that allowed us to detect the parameters that suffer from problems affecting the quality. After the discovery of the parameters incapable to produce the quality required by the standards, we applies two machine learning technologies dedicated to the type of data of these parameters for detected the anomaly, the first technique called The kernel connectivity-based outlier factor (COF) algorithm consists in recording for each object the degree of being an outlier, the second technique called the Isolation Forest, its principle is to establish a forest to facilitate the calculation and description. The results obtained were compared in order to choose which is the best algorithm to monitor and detect the problems of these parameters, we find that the COF method is more efficient than the isolation forest which leads us to rely on this technology in this kind of process in order to avoid passing a bad quality to the customer in future.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207