Dynamic stationary subspace analysis based on Gaussian mixture models for ironmaking process monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Blast furnace ironmaking process monitoring is an important and challenging task. Due to the influence of hot blast stove switching and large fluctuations in the quality of raw materials, the measurements of ironmaking processes show obvious non‐stationary characteristics, and in addition, the observed data are also characterized by time‐series dynamic and non‐Gaussian characteristics. In this paper, a dynamic stationary subspace analysis method based on the Gaussian mixture model (DSSA–GMM) is proposed to address the difficulties in blast furnace ironmaking process monitoring. The time‐series dynamic relationship of the data is conducted by introducing a sliding time window. The Gaussian mixture model (GMM) is used to deal with the non‐Gaussian characteristics of the data, and the parameters of the GMMs are estimated using the expectation–maximization algorithm. The stationary projection matrix is obtained by optimizing the Kullback–Leibler (K–L) divergence between GMMs of different periods to realize the stationary subspace separation. Finally, the convex hull of the stationary subspace is established for fault detection, thus realizing the monitoring for non‐stationary and non‐Gaussian dynamic processes. The effectiveness of the DSSA–GMM method is verified by a numerical simulation and a dataset collected from an actual blast furnace ironmaking process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".