MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402245092 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25478

Dual‐noise autoencoder combining pseudo‐labels and consistency regularization for process fault classification

2024· article· en· W4402245092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xiaoping Guo, Qingyu Guo, Yuan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAutoencoderRegularization (linguistics)Consistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Noise (video)Computer scienceDual (grammatical number)Process (computing)Machine learningDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the classification of industrial process faults, the collected process fault data has the problem of having more irrelevant fault information, limited labels, and a significant impact of noise, which affects the prediction accuracy of the classification model. To address these problems, this paper proposes a semi‐supervised dual‐noise autoencoder method that integrates pseudo‐labels and consistency regularization (PR‐SNAE). Based on normal samples, the differences between faulty samples and normal samples are enhanced through dissimilarity analysis. Two types of noise are introduced into the enhanced samples to improve the robustness of the model. A stacked supervised autoencoder (SSAE) network is trained using a small amount of labelled data. The deep feature information is extracted to establish a preliminary fault classification model. Pseudo‐labels are generated for unlabelled samples to overcome the problem of insufficient labels for fault data. In the adjustment stage of the classification model, a loss function that integrates pseudo‐labels and consistency regularization is proposed to prevent overfitting and poor robustness of the model. Simulation experiments were conducted on the Tennessee Eastman (TE) benchmark process and three‐phase flow process, and the results verified the effectiveness of the proposed method.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207