Spatiotemporal Topology-Informed Multiagent Reinforcement Learning Framework for Structured Multiprocess Collaborative Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Industrial multiprocess collaborative optimization presents significant challenges due to the intricate spatiotemporal dependencies inherent in modern process industries. Traditional optimization and reinforcement learning often treat subprocesses as independent entities, neglecting the fine-grained interdependencies among operational variables across different subprocesses. To fundamentally address this limitation, we introduce, a novel spatiotemporal topology-informed multiprocess collaborative optimization (STI-MCO) framework, which pioneers action-level interdependency modeling through an innovative spatiotemporal graph architecture. Rather than treating subprocesses as monolithic entities, STI-MCO operates at the operational variable level, enabling precise representation of both interprocess relationships and intraprocess dependencies through a hierarchical two-stage decision framework. This approach enables more precise coordination through fine-grained variable interactions, better temporal consistency via dynamic graph structures, and enhanced scalability compared with conventional agent-level methods. This paradigm shift from subprocess-level to variable-level collaboration, combined with dynamic graph-based coordination, enables extensive simulations and experiments conducted across three benchmark environments with progressively complex topologies to demonstrate that STI-MCO consistently outperforms baseline methods, achieving up to 38.9% improvement over centralized methods and 171.9% improvement over existing multiagent strategies. In addition, STI-MCO exhibits superior convergence efficiency, requiring significantly fewer training steps to achieve high performance. Its practical applicability is further validated through deployment in a real-world Salt Lake chemical process. By fundamentally shifting the optimization paradigm from holistic subprocess control to fine-grained variable-level collaboration, this work establishes a new framework for more effective optimization in complex industrial processes, particularly those with strong interunit coupling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".