A Decision Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework under Data Quality Challenges in Manufacturing
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Data Quality Issues
1.2. Persistent and Non-Negligible Measurement Uncertainty
1.3. The Tremendous Destructiveness of Sensor Failures in Continuous Decision-Making
1.4. Risk: Potential Losses
1.5. Necessity of Risk Assessment Framework
1.6. Conclusions
- Risk is defined as potential loss and indicates the decision-making model’s performance. A risk assessment and reduction framework is established at three levels: perception, decision, and execution, focusing on on-site data quality issues and associated risks.
- The risk level is evaluated by Monte Carlo simulation considering the quality of on-site measurements and typical working conditions.
- Based on this framework, three applications are introduced.
2. Problem Statement
- n is the number of variables input data to the decision model;
- is the input variables of the, the decision model, ;
- is the difference between true value and measured values, ; it contains the data quality characteristics;
- k is the number of potential accidents identified caused by the faulty data in the decision-making model;
- z is the output of the decision model;
- is the output bias of the decision model;
- is the relation model between the decision and the probability of the accident, ;
- is the probability of the accident, ;
- is the damage cost due to the accident, ;
- is the potential loss (risk) that the system faced by accident, .
2.1. Assumption of Decision-Making Model
- are the input variables of the decision model;
- z is the output of the decision model.
2.2. Assumption of Data Quality Issues
2.3. Assumption of Risk Identification and Evaluation Model
3. Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework
3.1. Decision Risk Assessment by Monte Carlo Simulation
Algorithm 1 Risk Assessment for Decision under Uncertain Information |
|
3.2. Risk Alleviation Applications
3.2.1. Control Parameter Selection under Persistent Measurement Uncertainty
Step 1: Typical Scenario Dataset Construction
Step 2: Advice for Parameter Selection
3.2.2. Sensor Selection and Maintenance Reminding
3.2.3. Sensor Active Fault-Tolerant Control
Algorithm 2 Sensor Active Fault-tolerant Control |
|
Step 2: Real-Time Fault Detection and Maximum Risk Minimization Control
4. Case Study from Steel Industry
4.1. Brief Introduction
- Data Collection
- Risk Identification and Calculation
4.2. Simulation
4.2.1. Simulation for Risk and Fault-Tolerance Control
Step 1: Typical Scenario Dataset Construction
Step 2: Advice for Parameter Selection
4.2.2. Sensor Selection and Maintenance Reminding
4.2.3. Sensor Active Fault-Tolerant Control
Step 1: Virtual Measurement Model
Step 2: Real-Time Fault Detection and Maximum Risk Minimization Control
4.3. Conclusions
5. General Conclusions and Further Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Control Method by Current Cooling Capacity
Appendix B. Risk Identification and Calculation
Appendix B.1. Risk of Defective Product
Appendix B.2. Risk of Cooling Power Waste
References
- Folgado, F.J.; Calderón, D.; González, I.; Calderón, A.J. Review of Industry 4.0 from the Perspective of Automation and Supervision Systems: Definitions, Architectures and Recent Trends. Electronics 2024, 13, 782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qi, Q.; Xu, Z.; Rani, P. Big Data Analytics Challenges to Implementing the Intelligent Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) Systems in Sustainable Manufacturing Operations. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2023, 190, 122401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zaveri, A.; Rula, A.; Maurino, A.; Pietrobon, R.; Lehmann, J.; Auer, S. Quality Assessment for Linked Data: A Survey. Semant. Web 2016, 7, 63–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bizer, C.; Cyganiak, R. Quality-Driven Information Filtering Using the WIQA Policy Framework. J. Web Semant 2009, 7, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yuan, T.; Adjallah, K.H.; Sava, A.; Wang, H.; Liu, L. Issues of Intelligent Data Acquisition and Quality for Manufacturing Decision-Support in an Industry 4.0 Context. In Proceedings of the 2021 11th IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (IDAACS), Cracow, Poland, 22–25 September 2021; Volume 2, pp. 1200–1205. [Google Scholar]
- ISO ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007; International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms (VIM). ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007.
- JCGM. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement—Part 6: Developing and Using Measurement Models; BIPM: Paris, France, 2020; Available online: https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/50065290/JCGM_GUM_6_2020.pdf/d4e77d99-3870-0908-ff37-c1b6a230a337 (accessed on 3 June 2024).
- Wade, H. The Elephant in the Room, or the Impact of Measurement Uncertainty on Risk-ProQuest. Quality 2023, 62, 12. [Google Scholar]
- Goknil, A.; Nguyen, P.; Sen, S.; Politaki, D.; Niavis, H.; Pedersen, K.J.; Suyuthi, A.; Anand, A.; Ziegenbein, A. A Systematic Review of Data Quality in CPS and IoT for Industry 4.0. ACM Comput. Surv. 2023, 55, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ibrion, M.; Paltrinieri, N.; Nejad, A.R. On Risk of Digital Twin Implementation in Marine Industry: Learning from Aviation Industry. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2019, 1357, 012009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abbas, N.; Abbas, Z.; Zafar, S.; Ahmad, N.; Liu, X.; Khan, S.S.; Foster, E.D.; Larkin, S. Survey of Advanced Nonlinear Control Strategies for UAVs: Integration of Sensors and Hybrid Techniques. Sensors 2024, 24, 3286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zolghadri, A. A review of fault management issues in aircraft systems: Current status and future directions. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2024, 147, 101008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schultz, J.V. A Framework for Military Decision Making Under Risks; Air University: Montgomery, AL, USA, 1996; Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep13847 (accessed on 3 June 2024).
- Sun, D.; Wang, H.; Huang, J.; Zhang, J.; Liu, G. Urban Road Waterlogging Risk Assessment Based on the Source Pathway Receptor Concept in Shenzhen, China. J. Flood Risk Man. 2023, 16, e12873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Wang, D.; Lin, Q.; Deng, M. Risk assessment based on FMEA combining DEA and cloud model: A case application in robot-assisted rehabilitation. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 214, 119119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ni, H.; Chen, A.; Chen, N. Some Extensions on Risk Matrix Approach. Saf. Sci. 2010, 48, 1269–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gou, X.; Xu, Z.; Zhou, W.; Herrera-Viedma, E. The Risk Assessment of Construction Project Investment Based on Prospect Theory with Linguistic Preference Orderings. Econ. Res.-Ekon. Istraz. 2021, 34, 709–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Zeng, M. Renewable Energy Investment Risk Evaluation Model Based on System Dynamics. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 73, 782–788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Munoz, R.; Vaghefi, S.A.; Sharma, A.; Muccione, V. A Framework for Policy Assessment Using Exploratory Modeling and Analysis: An Application in Flood Control. Clim. Risk Manag. 2024, 45, 100635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdrabo, K.I.; Kantoush, S.A.; Esmaiel, A.; Saber, M.; Sumi, T.; Almamari, M.; Elboshy, B.; Ghoniem, S. An Integrated Indicator-Based Approach for Constructing an Urban Flood Vulnerability Index as an Urban Decision-Making Tool Using the PCA and AHP Techniques: A Case Study of Alexandria, Egypt. Urban Clim. 2023, 48, 101426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, X.; Lu, H.; Xia, Y.; Xiong, Z. Decision-Making Model under Risk Assessment Based on Entropy. Entropy 2016, 18, 404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, Y.; Zheng, J.; Zhang, R.; Yang, Y. An Evidence-Based Risk Decision Support Approach for Metro Tunnel Construction. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2022, 28, 377–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, D.; Hou, L.; Wang, S.; Bu, X.; Xia, X. Energy Flow Analysis of Excavator System Based on Typical Working Condition Load. Electronics 2022, 11, 1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peng, Y.; Zhuang, Y.; Yang, H. Development of a Representative Driving Cycle for Urban Buses Based on the K-Means Cluster Method. Clust. Comput. 2019, 22, 6871–6880. [Google Scholar]
- Xie, H.; Tian, G.; Chen, H.; Wang, J.; Huang, Y. A Distribution Density-Based Methodology for Driving Data Cluster Analysis: A Case Study for an Extended-Range Electric City Bus. Pattern Recognit. 2018, 73, 131–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiu, H.; Cui, S.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Feng, M. A Clustering-Based Optimization Method for the Driving Cycle Construction: A Case Study in Fuzhou and Putian, China. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2022, 23, 18681–18694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kloppers, J.C.; Krošger, D.G. Cooling Tower Performance Evaluation: Merkel, Poppe, and e-NTU Methods of Analysis. J. Eng. Gas. Turbine Power 2005, 127, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaber, H.; Webb, R.L. Design of Cooling Towers by the Effectiveness-NTU Method. J. Heat Transf. 1989, 111, 837–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Types | Data Quality Characteristics |
---|---|
Inherent | Accuracy, Credibility, Completeness, Consistency, Error, Synchronicity, Variance, Objectivity, Reputation, Uncertainty |
Inherent and system-dependent | Accessibility, Appropriate amount of data, Compliance, Concise representation, Ease to manipulate, Timeliness, Traceability, Understandability |
System-dependent | Availability, Portability, Relevance, Interpretability, Security, Value-added |
Cumulative Risk of Product Loss (CU) | Cumulative Risk of Energy Waste (CU) | Cumulative All Risk (CU) | |
---|---|---|---|
2.5 | 193.90 | 279.51 | 473.41 |
2.6 | 162.03 | 298.78 | 460.80 |
2.7 | 130.76 | 317.70 | 448.47 |
2.8 | 115.69 | 336.90 | 452.58 |
2.9 | 102.03 | 356.02 | 458.05 |
3.0 | 91.45 | 374.96 | 466.41 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yuan, T.; Adjallah, K.H.; Sava, A.; Wang, H.; Liu, L. A Decision Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework under Data Quality Challenges in Manufacturing. Sensors 2024, 24, 6586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24206586
Yuan T, Adjallah KH, Sava A, Wang H, Liu L. A Decision Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework under Data Quality Challenges in Manufacturing. Sensors. 2024; 24(20):6586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24206586
Chicago/Turabian StyleYuan, Tangxiao, Kondo Hloindo Adjallah, Alexandre Sava, Huifen Wang, and Linyan Liu. 2024. "A Decision Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework under Data Quality Challenges in Manufacturing" Sensors 24, no. 20: 6586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24206586
APA StyleYuan, T., Adjallah, K. H., Sava, A., Wang, H., & Liu, L. (2024). A Decision Risk Assessment and Alleviation Framework under Data Quality Challenges in Manufacturing. Sensors, 24(20), 6586. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24206586