MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375863683 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24935

A novel density ratio‐based batch active learning fault diagnosis method integrated with adaptive Laplacian graph trimming

2023· article· en· W4375863683 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xue Jiang, Yuan Xu, Qunxiong Zhu, Yang Zhang, Yan‐Lin He, Ming‐Qing Zhang, Wei Ke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTrimmingOutlierComputer scienceClassifier (UML)GraphLocal outlier factorArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In actual industrial processes, although a large number of original data are easy to obtain, only a few samples are effectively labelled, which is insufficient to construct a supervised fault diagnostic model. Facing the industrial demand of fault diagnosis, in this paper, a novel density ratio (DR)‐based batch active learning (BAL) fault diagnosis method integrated with adaptive Laplacian graph trimming (ALGT) method is proposed. First, under the active learning framework, a new index DR‐based on local reachability density (LRD) is proposed to search the low density and high uncertainty samples, in which the local outliers factor (LOF) is used to search the samples in low density region and the ratio of LRD and intra‐class LRD is calculated to search the samples with high uncertainty. Second, the samples are selected and manually labelled in batches according to the proposed index DR, and the labelled data set and the unlabelled data set are updated and reconstructed. Third, based on the reconstructed labelled dataset and remaining unlabelled dataset, a semi‐supervised classifier ALGT is constructed for fault diagnosis. In ALGT, the Laplacian weighted graph is initialized and iteratively optimized by ALGT. Finally, the proposed DR‐based BAL‐ALGT (DRBAL‐ALGT) fault diagnosis method is verified by the Tennessee Eastman process (TEP) and applied to grid‐connected photovoltaic systems (GPVS). The experimental results show that the proposed DRBAL‐ALGT method can achieve higher accuracy for fault diagnosis.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207