MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4375950726 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24953

Cascading failure invulnerability analysis of chemical material network considering failure propagation capability

2023· article· en· W4375950726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Huapeng Li, Zheng Wang, Ruijie Liu, Jingmin Hou, Zhaofei Dong, Tongtong Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicComplex Network Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascading failureFlammable liquidEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionProcess (computing)Network topologyComputer scienceExplosive materialFault (geology)Topology (electrical circuits)Reliability engineeringNonlinear systemEngineeringComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The material network in the chemical process has the characteristics of a complex network. Once the fault occurs, it will spread and lead to cascading failures, causing the chemical production process to not proceed normally. Previous studies of cascading failures have been limited by the size and characteristics of the network, which prevented the definition of the fault propagation capacity of the edge based on the actual situation. Studies on the effects of network topology and certain risk factors on the amount of fault propagation still need to be completed. Because of the above shortcomings, this study constructs a chemical material network cascading failure invulnerability analysis model that considers the failure propagation ability. Through the study of the chemical material network topology structure and the analysis of various flammable and explosive chemicals, the paper defines the fault propagation coefficient, which affects the load propagation quantity on the connecting edge. Then, based on the load‐capacity nonlinear cascading failure model, the chemical material network's invulnerability was analyzed by adjusting the model parameters. The effectiveness of the model is verified through case analysis. Compared to the existing model, the model in this paper effectively improves the invulnerability of the material network and can reduce the phenomenon of large‐scale failure of the material network due to the failure propagation capability is not considered.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicComplex Network Analysis Techniques→French-language works237,207→