MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382568069 · doi:10.1109/tcst.2023.3287758

Fault-Tolerant Soft Sensors for Dynamic Systems

2023· article· en· W4382568069 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSubspace topologyEstimatorComputer scienceSoft sensorFault toleranceScheme (mathematics)ImplementationFault detection and isolationSoft errorFault (geology)Real-time computingDistributed computingComputer engineeringAlgorithmElectronic engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProcess (computing)StatisticsActuator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unpredicted faults occurring in automation systems deteriorate the performance of soft sensors and may even lead to incorrect results. To address the problem, this study develops three novel data-driven approaches for development of soft sensors. The three proposed soft sensors have fault-tolerant abilities. They are, respectively, called measurement space-aided scheme (MSaS), subspace-aided scheme (SSaS), and improved MSaS (IMSaS). As means to obtain more accurate results of soft sensors in the online phase: 1) MSaS constructs an optimal estimator of faults in the measurement space; 2) SSaS removes the influences caused by unknown sensor faults with the aid of a constructed subspace; and 3) IMSaS is an improved version of MSaS, eliminating the influences of the past prediction error that may accumulate and affect the current prediction result. They are the output-driven fault-tolerant soft sensors because their implementations rely on system measurements only. Furthermore, performance analysis is also conducted to investigate the estimation errors. Both the sufficient and necessary conditions for these designs are provided, and illustrations of the effectiveness and feasibility of the three proposed fault-tolerant soft sensors based on two case studies are given.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.214 · 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