MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405216868 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25562

A review of statistical process monitoring methods for non‐linear and non‐Gaussian industrial processes

2024· review· en· W4405216868 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yang Zhou, Kai Wang, Yilan Zhang, Dan Liang, Jia Li

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProcess (computing)Computer scienceQuality (philosophy)Statistical process controlProduct (mathematics)Industrial productionManagement scienceIndustrial engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringData scienceEngineeringMathematicsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In modern industrial processes, the growing emphasis on product quality and efficiency has led to increased attention on safety and quality issues within industrial processes. Over the past two decades, there has been extensive research into multivariate statistical process monitoring methods. However, basic statistical process monitoring methods still face significant challenges when applied in diverse real‐world operating conditions. This paper offers a comprehensive review of statistical process monitoring methods for industrial processes. First, this paper begins by outlining the methodologies and modelling procedures commonly used in statistical process monitoring for industrial processes. Then, examine the current research landscape across various aspects of these methods. Finally, this paper delves into the extensions, opportunities, and challenges within statistical process monitoring for industrial processes, offering insights for future research directions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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