An Integrated Dynamic and Quality Modeling Framework for Batch Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This manuscript considers batch process operations and addresses the challenge of identifying a model that synergistically captures the dynamic input–output behavior of continuously measured variables along with the quality variables measured only at batch termination. To this end, an optimization-based framework is developed to identify one model that captures both the dynamics between the inputs and the continuously measured output variables, measurements of which are available at every time step, and the relation between the dynamic “state” information and the terminal quality measurements. Existing approaches either do not identify the dynamic and the quality model simultaneously, or they simply connect the whole trajectory of the process variables with the qualities and do not address the dynamic relationship between the inputs and the process variables. The improved modelling performance of the model obtained from this approach is demonstrated using data from a Uni-axial Rotational Molding process, and compared with existing modelling approaches. • Quality modelling in batch processes using state space modelling approach. • Modelling framework to identify quality and dynamic models together. • Previous approaches modeled dynamics and the quality separately. • Proposed approach shows improvement in quality prediction accuracy over previous approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".