MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402379772 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25492

<scp>DBFact</scp> applied to minimum variance performance assessment for nonminimum phase multivariate systems from closed‐loop data

2024· article· en· W4402379772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Lima, Jorge Otávio Trierweiler, Marcelo Farenzena

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPetrobrasCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsLoop (graph theory)Variance (accounting)Phase (matter)Control theory (sociology)Multivariate analysis of varianceClosed loopComputer scienceMathematicsStatisticsChemistryEngineeringControl engineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper introduces an approach for determining a minimum variance control (MVC) benchmark for nonminimum phase (NMP) multi‐input multi‐output (MIMO) systems using closed‐loop operational data. The MVC benchmark is derived from the MVC law of DBFact factorization introduced by Lima, Trierweiler, and Farenzena. Unlike other factorization methods, DBFact offers advantages such as non‐iterative computation and ensuring internal stability of the MVC law. This approach considers the inherent directionality of NMP MIMO systems, enhancing the reliability of the control performance index. However, the original method relies on prior knowledge of the process model. To overcome this limitation, this paper proposes a method for calculating the MVC benchmark when prior knowledge is absent. It introduces a MIMO system identification strategy employing minimally invasive signal tests. The methodology is evaluated across various control conditions using a quadruple‐tank plant with additional time delays. The study emphasizes the importance of directionality in assessing MIMO system performance, particularly in evaluating individual loop performances. Results demonstrate the identification procedure's effectiveness in accurately calculating the proposed MVC benchmark, even with a mere 1% increase in output variance considered.

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)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicFault Detection and Control Systems→French-language works237,207→