MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381380952 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25025

Adversarial autoencoder concurrent projection to latent structure and its application

2023· article· en· W4381380952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dongyu Liu, Jinglin Zhou, Huixia Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoencoderOrthogonalityProjection (relational algebra)Computer scienceMultivariate statisticsMultivariate normal distributionArtificial intelligenceGaussianKrigingPattern recognition (psychology)Transformation (genetics)Fault (geology)Gaussian processData miningProjection pursuitFault detection and isolationAlgorithmMachine learningMathematicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Multivariate monitoring plays an important role in process monitoring. Among the multivariate monitoring methods, the projection to latent structure method (PLS) has been most widely used in the fields of quality control and fault diagnosis. To improve the monitoring capability of traditional PLS methods in nonlinear and non‐Gaussian multivariate systems, this paper proposes an innovative multivariate monitoring strategy, which combines adversarial autoencoder (AAE) and the concurrent projection to latent structure method (CPLS). In the proposed strategy, the original data are mapped to the high‐dimensional space using the AAE method with the Gaussian prior distribution to realize data transformation. The mapped data are linearly divisible and approach the Gaussian distribution. Then, the projection with orthogonality is realized using the CPLS method. In addition, the reconstruction error and distribution properties are used as evaluation indexes of the high‐dimensional mapping performance. The corresponding monitoring strategy is established using the traditional statistical method based on the Gaussian distribution. Finally, the simulations are performed on the Tennessee‐Eastman process platform, and the results show that the proposed method could efficiently extract the principal components, especially in quality‐relevant fault monitoring.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207