MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386527644 · doi:10.1080/00207543.2023.2254854

A sequential cross-product knowledge accumulation, extraction and transfer framework for machine learning-based production process modelling

2023· article· en· W4386527644 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiarui Xie, Chonghui Zhang, Manuel Sage, Mutahar Safdar, Yaoyao Fiona Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Production Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Research Council CanadaMitacsMcGill University
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceKnowledge transferData pre-processingData miningProduction (economics)Knowledge extractionScarcityExploitProduct (mathematics)PreprocessorFeature selectionFeature (linguistics)Industrial engineeringEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning is a promising method to model production processes and predict product quality. It is challenging to accurately model complex systems due to data scarcity, as mass customisation leads to various high-variety low-volume products. This study conceptualised knowledge accumulation, extraction, and transfer (KAET) to exploit the knowledge embedded in similar entities to address data scarcity. A sequential cross-product KAET (SeqTrans) is proposed to conduct KAET, integrating data preparation and preprocessing, feature selection (FS), feature learning (FL), and transfer learning (TL). The FS and FL modules conduct knowledge extraction and help address various practical challenges such as changing operating conditions and unbalanced datasets. In this paper, sequential TL is introduced to production modelling to conduct knowledge transfer among multiple entities. The first case study of auxetic material performance prediction demonstrates the effectiveness of sequential TL. Compared with conventional TL, sequential TL can achieve the same test mean square errors with 300 fewer training examples when facing data scarcity. In the second case study, balancing anomaly detection models were constructed for two gas turbines in the same series using real-world production data. With SeqTrans, the F1-score of the anomaly detection model of the data-poor engine was improved from 0.769 to 0.909.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Production ResearchSame topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207