MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399732050 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.4c00540

Unified Unit-Wise and Plantwide Monitoring: Application in Early Detection of Gas Flare Event

2024· article· en· W4399732050 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Memarian, Ranjith Chiplunkar, Jayaram Valluru, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicOil, Gas, and Environmental Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsFlareEvent (particle physics)Computer scienceEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringPhysicsEngineeringAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gas flaring is a prevalent practice in various industrial processes, primarily instituted as a safety measure to relieve overpressure from storage vessels or pipelines, thereby enhancing process safety. However, while it bolsters operational safety, gas flaring is also a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. Mitigating its environmental impact necessitates the early detection of flare events and prompt corrective actions. This paper introduces a novel integrated approach for the early detection of gas flare events, surpassing existing state-of-the-art methodologies. The proposed approach considers both unit-wise and plantwide dynamics to provide a more comprehensive approach to monitoring the process. The unit-wise monitoring is performed based on probabilistic slow feature analysis (PSFA), which is a linear dynamic latent variable model. This work implements PSFA in a moving window framework to make it adaptive to the time-varying process dynamics of each unit. Finally, the plantwide dynamic latent variables are extracted using a novel variational autoencoder-based architecture. The efficacy of the proposed algorithm is illustrated through a real-world case study from a refinery, showcasing its superior performance in terms of accuracy and reliability.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicOil, Gas, and Environmental IssuesFrench-language works237,207