MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388998835 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48206-1

Monitoring the process mean under the Bayesian approach with application to hard bake process

2023· article· en· W4388998835 on OpenAlexaff
Imad Khan, Muhammad Noor‐ul‐Amin, Dost Muhammad Khan, Emad A. A. Ismail, Javed Rahimi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Statistical Process Monitoring
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsControl chartCovariateComputer scienceBayesian probabilityChartVariance (accounting)StatisticsProcess (computing)Mean squared errorMathematicsMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces the Bayesian adaptive exponentially weighted moving average (AEWMA) control chart within the framework of measurement error, examining two separate loss functions: the squared error loss function and the linex loss function. We conduct an analysis of the posterior and posterior predictive distributions utilizing a conjugate prior. In the presence of measurement error (ME), we employ a linear covariate model to assess the control chart's effectiveness. Additionally, we explore the impacts of measurement error by investigating multiple measurements and a method involving linearly increasing variance. We conduct a Monte Carlo simulation study to assess the control chart's performance under ME, examining its run length profile. Subsequently, we offer a specific numerical instance related to the hard-bake process in semiconductor manufacturing, serving to verify the functionality and practical application of the suggested Bayesian AEWMA control chart when confronted with ME.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAdvanced Statistical Process MonitoringFrench-language works237,207