基于跨运行稳定统计特征与类别感知自适应融合的流程工业故障诊断方法研究
Process Industry Fault Diagnosis Based on Cross-Run Stable Statistical Features and Class-Aware Adaptive Fusion
摘要: 工业时序文本化有助于利用过程变量的语义信息,但会压缩原始信号中的频域结构和局部变化特征;与此同时,辅助数值信息对不同故障类别及不同样本的补偿作用并不一致。针对上述问题,本文构建基于跨运行稳定统计特征的数值分支,并提出类别感知自适应融合方法(Class-Aware Adaptive Fusion, CAAF)。该方法首先根据故障效应方向与幅度在两个独立开发运行间的一致性筛选主频幅值占比、主频位置和单调性三类统计特征,通过变量身份映射与轻量编码器生成数值类别得分;随后,将传统样本级融合权重扩展为样本–类别级权重,采用类别系数刻画数值证据对不同候选类别的修正作用,并利用文本置信度门控调节其样本介入程度。TEP 21类故障诊断结果表明,CAAF的准确率达到94.51%,较纯文本分支、静态融合和QMF分别提高1.83、1.14和0.75个百分点,在IDV-16至IDV-20五类困难故障上的平均准确率达到89.35%。消融实验、多种子重复训练和数值信息扰动实验进一步表明,性能增益主要来自稳定统计信息对文本分支类别相关错判的选择性补偿。
Abstract: Converting industrial time series into structured text facilitates the use of process semantics but compresses frequency-domain structures and local variations in the original signals. Meanwhile, the complementary value of auxiliary numeric information varies across fault classes and samples. To address these issues, this paper constructs a numeric branch based on cross-run stable statistical features and proposes class-aware adaptive fusion (CAAF). Dominant-frequency amplitude ratio, dominant-frequency location, and monotonicity are first selected according to the consistency of fault-effect directions and magnitudes across independent development runs. Variable-identity mapping and a lightweight encoder then transform these statistics into numeric class scores. CAAF further extends conventional sample-wise fusion to sample-class-specific weighting: class-wise coefficients characterize class-dependent numeric corrections, while a text-confidence gate controls sample-dependent intervention. Experiments on the 21-class Tennessee Eastman Process benchmark show that CAAF achieves an accuracy of 94.51%, exceeding the text-only branch, static fusion, and QMF by 1.83, 1.14, and 0.75 percentage points, respectively. Its average accuracy on the five difficult classes from IDV-16 to IDV-20 reaches 89.35%. Ablation, multi-seed repeated training, and numeric-information perturbation experiments further indicate that the improvement mainly arises from selective compensation for class-dependent errors of the text branch.
文章引用:王钰凯, 辜小花, 陈余, 冉志勇. 基于跨运行稳定统计特征与类别感知自适应融合的流程工业故障诊断方法研究[J]. 计算机科学与应用, 2026, 16(11): 12-27. https://doi.org/10.12677/csa.2026.1611322

参考文献

[1] Venkatasubramanian, V., Rengaswamy, R., Yin, K. and Kavuri, S.N. (2003) A Review of Process Fault Detection and Diagnosis: Part I: Quantitative Model-Based Methods. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 27, 293-311.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0098-1354(02)00160-6
[2] Yin, S., Ding, S.X., Haghani, A., Hao, H. and Zhang, P. (2012) A Comparison Study of Basic Data-Driven Fault Diagnosis and Process Monitoring Methods on the Benchmark Tennessee Eastman Process. Journal of Process Control, 22, 1567-1581.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jprocont.2012.06.009
[3] Downs, J.J. and Vogel, E.F. (1993) A Plant-Wide Industrial Process Control Problem. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 17, 245-255.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(93)80018-i
[4] Rieth, C.A., Amsel, B.D., Tran, R., et al. (2017) Additional Tennessee Eastman Process Simulation Data for Anomaly Detection Evaluation. Harvard Dataverse.
[5] Lomov, I., Lyubimov, M., Makarov, I. and Zhukov, L.E. (2021) Fault Detection in Tennessee Eastman Process with Temporal Deep Learning Models. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 23, Article ID: 100216.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jii.2021.100216
[6] Zhang, S. and Qiu, T. (2022) Semi-Supervised LSTM Ladder Autoencoder for Chemical Process Fault Diagnosis and Localization. Chemical Engineering Science, 251, Article ID: 117467.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2022.117467
[7] Peng, P., Zhang, Y., Wang, H. and Zhang, H. (2022) Towards Robust and Understandable Fault Detection and Diagnosis Using Denoising Sparse Autoencoder and Smooth Integrated Gradients. ISA Transactions, 125, 371-383.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2021.06.005
[8] Lin, Z., Hu, Z., Peng, J. and Zhao, H. (2022) Dynamic-Scale Graph Neural Network for Fault Detection. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 168, 953-970.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.10.036
[9] Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., et al. (2017) Attention Is All You Need. arXiv: 1706.03762.
[10] Devlin, J., Chang, M., Lee, K. and Toutanova, K. (2019) BERT: Pre-Training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), Minneapolis, 2-7 June 2019, 4171-4186.
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/n19-1423
[11] Jin, M., Wang, S., Ma, L., et al. (2024) Time-LLM: Time Series Forecasting by Reprogramming Large Language Models. arXiv: 2310.01728.
[12] Zhou, T., Niu, P., Wang, X., Sun, L. and Jin, R. (2023) One Fits All: Power General Time Series Analysis by Pretrained LM. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36, New Orleans, 10-16 December 2023, 43322-43355.
https://doi.org/10.52202/075280-1877
[13] Gruver, N., Finzi, M., Qiu, S. and Wilson, A. (2023) Large Language Models Are Zero-Shot Time Series Forecasters. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36, New Orleans, 10-16 December 2023, 19622-19635.
https://doi.org/10.52202/075280-0861
[14] Ansari, A.F., Stella, L., Turkmen, A.C., et al. (2024) Chronos: Learning the Language of Time Series. arXiv: 2403.07815.
[15] Han, Z., Zhang, C., Fu, H. and Zhou, J.T. (2023) Trusted Multi-View Classification with Dynamic Evidential Fusion. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45, 2551-2566.
https://doi.org/10.1109/tpami.2022.3171983
[16] Zhang, Q., Wu, H., Zhang, C., et al. (2023) Provable Dynamic Fusion for Low-Quality Multimodal Data. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning, Honolulu, 23-29 July 2023, 41753-41769.
[17] Zeng, Y., Mai, S. and Hu, H. (2021) Which Is Making the Contribution: Modulating Unimodal and Cross-Modal Dynamics for Multimodal Sentiment Analysis. Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021, Punta Cana, 7-11 November 2021, 1262-1274.
https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.findings-emnlp.109
[18] Wang, Y., Lei, Y., Li, N., Li, X. and Yang, B. (2025) Multimodal Correlation-Aware Fusion Framework for Enhanced Machinery Health Prognosis with Unlabeled and Low-Quality Data Exploitation. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 36, 12040-12051.
https://doi.org/10.1109/tnnls.2024.3453604
[19] McKinney, M., Garland, A., Cillessen, D., Adamczyk, J., Bolintineanu, D., Heiden, M., et al. (2025) Unsupervised Multimodal Fusion of In-Process Sensor Data for Advanced Manufacturing Process Monitoring. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 78, 271-282.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2024.12.003
[20] Peng, X., Wei, Y., Deng, A., Wang, D. and Hu, D. (2022) Balanced Multimodal Learning via On-the-Fly Gradient Modulation. 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), New Orleans, 18-24 June 2022, 8238-8247.
https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.00806
[21] Wei, Y. and Hu, D. (2024) MMPareto: Boosting Multimodal Learning with Innocent Unimodal Assistance. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, Vienna, 21-27 July 2024, 52559-52572.
[22] Lakens, D. (2013) Calculating and Reporting Effect Sizes to Facilitate Cumulative Science: A Practical Primer for T-Tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 863.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
[23] Qwen Team (2024) Qwen2.5 Technical Report. arXiv: 2412.15115.
[24] Cao, B., Xia, Y., Ding, Y., et al. (2024) Predictive Dynamic Fusion. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, Vienna, 21-27 July 2024, 5608-5628.
[25] Gong, B., Gao, X., Zhu, P., Hu, Q. and Cao, B. (2025) Multimodal Negative Learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 38, San Diego, 2-7 December 2025, 170087-170118.
https://doi.org/10.52202/085713-5125