Skip to main content

Comparing Machine Learning and Statistical Process Control for Predicting Manufacturing Performance

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11805))

Abstract

Quality has become one of the most important factors in the success of manufacturing companies. In this paper, the use of machine learning algorithms in quality control is compared to the use of statistical process monitoring, a classical quality management technique. The test dataset has a large number of features, which requires the use of principal component analysis and clustering to isolate the data into potential process groups. A Random Forest, Support Vector Machine and Naive Bayes algorithms were used to predict when the manufacturing process is out of control. The Random Forest algorithm performed significantly better than both the Naive Bayes and SVM algorithms in all 3 clusters of the dataset. The results were benchmarked against Hotelling’s \(T^2\) control charts which were trained using 80% of each cluster dataset and tested on the remaining 20%. In comparison with Hotelling’s \(T^2\) multivariate statistical process monitoring charts, the Random Forest algorithm still emerges as the better quality control method.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ahsan, M., Mashuri, M., Kuswanto, H., Prastyo, D.D., et al.: Intrusion detection system using multivariate control chart Hotelling’s T2 based on PCA. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 8(5), 1905–1911 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bekkar, M., Djemaa, H.K., Alitouche, T.A.: Evaluation measures for models assessment over imbalanced data sets. J. Inf. Eng. Appl. 3(10) (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bersimis, S., Panaretos, J., Psarakis, S.: Multivariate statistical process control charts and the problem of interpretation: a short overview and some applications in industry. In: Proceedings of the 7th Hellenic European Conference on Computer Mathematics and its Applications, Athens, Greece (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Breiman, L.: Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45(1), 5–32 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Olshen, R., Stone, C.: Classification and Regression Trees, vol. 37, no. 15, pp. 237–251. Wadsworth International Group (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chiang, L.H., Kotanchek, M.E., Kordon, A.K.: Fault diagnosis based on fisher discriminant analysis and support vector machines. Comput. Chem. Eng. 28(8), 1389–1401 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cortes, C., Vapnik, V.: Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20(3), 273–297 (1995)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Escobar, C.A., Morales-Menendez, R.: Machine learning techniques for quality control in high conformance manufacturing environment. Adv. Mech. Eng. 10(2), 1687814018755519 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans, J.R., Lindsay, W.M.C.: The management and control of quality. Technical report, South Western (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gao, X., Hou, J.: An improved SVM integrated GS-PCA fault diagnosis approach of tennessee eastman process. Neurocomputing 174, 906–911 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hand, D.J., Yu, K.: Idiot’s bayes–not so stupid after all? Int. stat. Rev. 69(3), 385–398 (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Hotelling, H.: Multivariate Quality Control. Techniques of Statistical Analysis. McGraw-Hill, New York (1947)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kourti, T., Macgregor, J.F.: Multivariate SPC methods for process and product monitoring. J. Qual. Technol. 28(4), 409–428 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lieber, D., Stolpe, M., Konrad, B., Deuse, J., Morik, K.: Quality prediction in interlinked manufacturing processes based on supervised and unsupervised machine learning. Proc. Cirp 7, 193–198 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. MacGregor, J.F., Kourti, T.: Statistical process control of multivariate processes. Control Eng. Pract. 3(3), 403–414 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Madanhire, I., Mbohwa, C.: Application of statistical process control (SPC) in manufacturing industry in a developing country. Proc. Cirp 40, 580–583 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. International Organization for Standardization: ISO 9000. Technical report, International Organization for Standardization (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sánchez-Fernádez, A.: Fault detection based on time series modelling and multivariate statistical process control. Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 182, 57–69 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wuest, T., Irgens, C., Thoben, K.D.: An approach to monitoring quality in manufacturing using supervised machine learning on product state data. J. Intell. Manuf. 25(5), 1167–1180 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yu, J., Xi, L., Zhou, X.: Identifying source(s) of out of control signals in multivariate manufacturing process using selective network ensemble. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 22, 141–152 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yu, J., Zheng, X., Wang, S.: Stacked denoising autoencoder-based feature learning for out-of-control source recognition in multivariate manufacturing process. Qual. Reliabi. Eng. Int. 35, 204–223 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang, D., Xu, B., Wood, J.: Predict failures in production lines: a two-stage approach with clustering and supervised learning. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), pp. 2070–2074. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacomine Grobler .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Khoza, S.C., Grobler, J. (2019). Comparing Machine Learning and Statistical Process Control for Predicting Manufacturing Performance. In: Moura Oliveira, P., Novais, P., Reis, L. (eds) Progress in Artificial Intelligence. EPIA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11805. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30244-3_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30244-3_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-30243-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-30244-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics