Regularized Operating Envelope with Interpretability and Implementability Constraints

21 Dec 2019  ·  Qiyao Wang, Hai-Yan Wang, Chetan Gupta, Susumu Serita ·

Operating envelope is an important concept in industrial operations. Accurate identification for operating envelope can be extremely beneficial to stakeholders as it provides a set of operational parameters that optimizes some key performance indicators (KPI) such as product quality, operational safety, equipment efficiency, environmental impact, etc. Given the importance, data-driven approaches for computing the operating envelope are gaining popularity. These approaches typically use classifiers such as support vector machines, to set the operating envelope by learning the boundary in the operational parameter spaces between the manually assigned `large KPI' and `small KPI' groups. One challenge to these approaches is that the assignment to these groups is often ad-hoc and hence arbitrary. However, a bigger challenge with these approaches is that they don't take into account two key features that are needed to operationalize operating envelopes: (i) interpretability of the envelope by the operator and (ii) implementability of the envelope from a practical standpoint. In this work, we propose a new definition for operating envelope which directly targets the expected magnitude of KPI (i.e., no need to arbitrarily bin the data instances into groups) and accounts for the interpretability and the implementability. We then propose a regularized `GA + penalty' algorithm that outputs an envelope where the user can tradeoff between bias and variance. The validity of our proposed algorithm is demonstrated by two sets of simulation studies and an application to a real-world challenge in the mining processes of a flotation plant.

PDF Abstract
No code implementations yet. Submit your code now

Tasks


Datasets


  Add Datasets introduced or used in this paper

Results from the Paper


  Submit results from this paper to get state-of-the-art GitHub badges and help the community compare results to other papers.

Methods