Comparison of deterministic, stochastic and fuzzy logic uncertainty modelling for capacity extension projects of DI/WFI pharmaceutical plant utilities with variable/dynamic demand

The last 30 years have seen Fuzzy Logic (FL) emerging as a method either complementing or challenging stochastic methods as the traditional method of modelling uncertainty. But the circumstances under which FL or stochastic methods should be used are shrouded in disagreement, because the areas of application of statistical and FL methods are overlapping with differences in opinion as to when which method should be used. Lacking are practically relevant case studies comparing these two methods. This work compares stochastic and FL methods for the assessment of spare capacity on the example of pharmaceutical high purity water (HPW) utility systems. The goal of this study was to find the most appropriate method modelling uncertainty in industrial scale HPW systems. The results provide evidence which suggests that stochastic methods are superior to the methods of FL in simulating uncertainty in chemical plant utilities including HPW systems in typical cases whereby extreme events, for example peaks in demand, or day-to-day variation rather than average values are of interest. The average production output or other statistical measures may, for instance, be of interest in the assessment of workshops. Furthermore the results indicate that the stochastic model should be used only if found necessary by a deterministic simulation. Consequently, this thesis concludes that either deterministic or stochastic methods should be used to simulate uncertainty in chemical plant utility systems and by extension some process system because extreme events or the modelling of day-to-day variation are important in capacity extension projects. Other reasons supporting the suggestion that stochastic HPW models are preferred to FL HPW models include: 1. The computer code for stochastic models is typically less complex than a FL models, thus reducing code maintenance and validation issues. 2. In many respects FL models are similar to deterministic models. Thus the need for a FL model over a deterministic model is questionable in the case of industrial scale HPW systems as presented here (as well as other similar systems) since the latter requires simpler models. 3. A FL model may be difficult to "sell" to an end-user as its results represent "approximate reasoning" a definition of which is, however, lacking. 4. Stochastic models may be applied with some relatively minor modifications on other systems, whereas FL models may not. For instance, the stochastic HPW system could be used to model municipal drinking water systems, whereas the FL HPW model should or could not be used on such systems. This is because the FL and stochastic model philosophies of a HPW system are fundamentally different. The stochastic model sees schedule and volume uncertainties as random phenomena described by statistical distributions based on either estimated or historical data. The FL model, on the other hand, simulates schedule uncertainties based on estimated operator behaviour e.g. tiredness of the operators and their working schedule. But in a municipal drinking water distribution system the notion of "operator" breaks down. 5. Stochastic methods can account for uncertainties that are difficult to model with FL. The FL HPW system model does not account for dispensed volume uncertainty, as there appears to be no reasonable method to account for it with FL whereas the stochastic model includes volume uncertainty.

A pro-active and dynamic prediction assistance using BaranC framework

Monitoring user interaction activities provides the basis for creating a user model that can be used to predict user behaviour and enable user assistant services. The BaranC framework provides components that perform UI monitoring (and collect all associated context data), builds a user model, and supports services that make use of the user model. In this case study, a Next-App prediction service is built to demonstrate the use of the framework and to evaluate the usefulness of such a prediction service. Next-App analyses a user's data, learns patterns, makes a model for a user, and finally predicts based on the user model and current context, what application(s) the user is likely to want to use. The prediction is pro-active and dynamic; it is dynamic both in responding to the current context, and also in that it responds to changes in the user model, as might occur over time as a user's habits change. Initial evaluation of Next-App indicates a high-level of satisfaction with the service.

A service-oriented user interaction analysis framework supporting adaptive applications

A comprehensive user model, built by monitoring a user's current use of applications, can be an excellent starting point for building adaptive user-centred applications. The BaranC framework monitors all user interaction with a digital device (e.g. smartphone), and also collects all available context data (such as from sensors in the digital device itself, in a smart watch, or in smart appliances) in order to build a full model of user application behaviour. The model built from the collected data, called the UDI (User Digital Imprint), is further augmented by analysis services, for example, a service to produce activity profiles from smartphone sensor data. The enhanced UDI model can then be the basis for building an appropriate adaptive application that is user-centred as it is based on an individual user model. As BaranC supports continuous user monitoring, an application can be dynamically adaptive in real-time to the current context (e.g. time, location or activity). Furthermore, since BaranC is continuously augmenting the user model with more monitored data, over time the user model changes, and the adaptive application can adapt gradually over time to changing user behaviour patterns. BaranC has been implemented as a service-oriented framework where the collection of data for the UDI and all sharing of the UDI data are kept strictly under the user's control. In addition, being service-oriented allows (with the user's permission) its monitoring and analysis services to be easily used by 3rd parties in order to provide 3rd party adaptive assistant services. An example 3rd party service demonstrator, built on top of BaranC, proactively assists a user by dynamic predication, based on the current context, what apps and contacts the user is likely to need. BaranC introduces an innovative user-controlled unified service model of monitoring and use of personal digital activity data in order to provide adaptive user-centred applications. This aims to improve on the current situation where the diversity of adaptive applications results in a proliferation of applications monitoring and using personal data, resulting in a lack of clarity, a dispersal of data, and a diminution of user control.