Document 4
Document 4
Document 4
DEXPI file of the P&ID is converted into a graph using Python. The plant topology
of the P&ID, including parameters relevant for modeling, is stored in a directed
graph in the form of a GraphML file (GraphML Project Group, 2017). A directed
graph, per definition, consists of a set N of nodes and a set E of edges. The edges
are directed, meaning that each edge is defined by ordered pairs of nodes (start
and end node) (Turau and Weyer, 2015). The P&ID to be processed is stored in the
DEXPI format, which is based on a Proteus XML schema (Proteus XML, 2017) and
contains three levels of information relevant for topology extraction. The
Equipment, which contains a listing of the components present in the P&ID. The
PipingNetworkSystem, which describes the piping system and the interconnections
between the various equipment, and the PipingComponents, which contain components
embedded in the piping system, like valves. The classes of equipment and components
are uniquely defined in DEXPI via the EquipmentClass and ComponentClass.
Furthermore, the InstrumentationFunction provides information about process control
equipment (PCE) and their connections. Fig. 2 shows the procedure used to convert
the P&ID via Python.
Figures (10)
Packt Publishing, Birmingham (2017)
Xiaochi Zhou, …, Markus Kraft
Grabisch et al., 2009
Google Scholar
Fig 9
View in ScopusGoogle Scholar
(1)
Abstract
Deep Learning and Practice with MindSpore, Cognitive Intelligence and Robotics
Download : Download high-res image (630KB)
Hamilton, 2020
Download : Download high-res image (186KB)
Fig 6
a weight factor
In the following, the different RNN models are used and trained with the in chapter
2.2 generated P&ID graphs according to the presented workflow. The implementation
is done in Python using the keras library (Chollet, 2020). The "Adam" optimizer
(Kingma and Ba, 2014) is used for all trainings and the calculation of the loss is
performed by the "categorical cross entropy" (Murphy, 2012). The prediction
accuracy is used as an evaluation metric and is defined as follows.
Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997
As mentioned before, the information from the P&ID is interpreted in the form of a
graph. This makes it possible to store the relationships between components and the
topology in an unambiguous and machine-interpretable way. However, to learn the
graph structure as a whole and to solve tasks such as node classification, edge
classification or link predictions, machine learning methods of graph analysis are
required that can deal with non-Euclidean data structures such as graphs. The
modeling of graph structures is particularly interesting in the field of P&ID
engineering. By learning connections (e.g. piping, signal lines, …) or components
(e.g. valves, equipment, …) based on their neighborhood with the help of AI, it
will be possible in the future to perform consistency checks in P&IDs and detect
errors in P&IDs. This could reduce the amount of time for drawing P&IDs, which will
shorten the time for developing a plants documentation. To achieve this goal, Graph
Neural Networks can be used for modeling Graph Neural Networks (GNN) can be used
for modelling, which have become increasingly important in recent years (Zhou et
al., 2020). A GNN is based on a message passing algorithm that aggregates arbitrary
information from the neighborhood of a node, which will convolve the graph
(Hamilton, 2020). In general, the message passing of a GNN is analogous to the
Weisfeiler-Lehman algorithm to test the isomorphism of two graphs (Weisfeiler and
Leman, 1968), which was introduced in 1968 and in which information is aggregated
from the neighborhood of each node.
Gulli and Pal, 2017
Proteus XML, 2017
Journals & Books
Fig. 3. P&ID topology representing GraphML structure used for further training
(4)
As a last investigated variant, the graph attention approach (8) is applied, where
additionally for each
Privacy policy
2023, arXiv
Zhao et al., 2005
M. Grabisch, J.-L. Marichal, R. Mesiar, E. Pap
Datasets
Conclusion & outlook
Download : Download high-res image (199KB)
is defined (Bahdanau et al., 2014; Hamilton, 2020). In the context of this work, a
softmax approach (9) is used to calculate the weight factor
Adam: a method for stochastic optimization
Safety valves 93
R. Batres, M.L. Lu, Y. Naka
A. Grover, J. Leskovec
Chem. Ing. Tech., 91 (2019), pp. 240-255, 10.1002/cite.201800112
Google Scholar
Download : Download high-res image (216KB)
Comput. Chem. Eng., 21 (1997), pp. S71-S76, 10.1016/S0098-1354(97)87481-9
Author links open overlay panelJonas Oeing a, Wolfgang Welscher b, Niclas Krink b,
Lars Jansen a, Fabian Henke a, Norbert Kockmann a
(5)
Fig. 2. Structure of the Python DEXPI-2-graph converter
Get rights and content
N
View PDF
Google Scholar
Fig. 10. Normalized confusion matrix of the recursive GNN with sum aggregation for
the test data set.
M. Wiedau, L. von Wedel, H. Temmen, R. Welke, N. Papakonstantinou
Download : Download full-size image
S. Hochreiter, J. Schmidhuber
Fig. 6. Results of the training of following P&ID equipment with different RNN
models.
x
StellarGraph 2020
1
Pumps 69
Towards a systematic data harmonization to enable AI application in the process
industry
Fig 4
Download : Download full-size image
Skip to main contentSkip to article
Google Scholar
International Electrotechnical Commission 2016
Keywords
DE GRUYTER, Berlin (2015), 10.1515/9783110417326
Google Scholar
Deep Learning with Applications Using Python
bias
Springer, Singapore, Singapore (2021), 10.1007/978-981-16-2233-5
The first step is sampling, during which the graph with its networked structure of
nodes and edges is sequentially transformed into linear input data. These input
data consist of a list of contiguous nodes, which contain the interconnected graph
in linear representations. In the sampling process, all possible turns based on the
number of output edges are made at branches to obtain a reliable representation of
all node interconnections via random walks (Grover and Leskovec, 2016). The
sampling is performed with the function randomBiasedWalk, which is part of the
Python library StellarGraph (package: stellargraph.data.BiasedRandomWalk / version:
v1.0.0rc1) (StellarGraph, 2020). The random biased walk requires four input
parameters. The number of walks defines how many walks are generated from each node
in the graph. The walk length specifies how many nodes are considered per walk.
Important special features of the biased random walk are the return hyperparameter
p and the in-out hyperparameter q, which guide the walk. Thus, 1/p defines the
probability of reversing the sampling direction during the random walk, while 1/q
describes the probability of discovering new nodes in the graph. In this way, the
depth of the search can specifically be controlled (Grover and Leskovec, 2016).
Since the generated samples should represent a clean and linear section of the
plant topology, the parameters must be chosen in a way that the random walk jumps
back as rarely as possible and continuously explores new paths. In this respect,
previous investigations have shown that convincing results can be achieved with
values of p = 1000 and q = 1. Smaller values of p, lead to an undesired probability
of sampling against the flow direction. The sequential samples represent the actual
training data for AI modeling and have a previously defined length l. They are
divided in such a way that the first l-1 entries represent the input sequence x,
while the entries at position l are the corresponding output y. The dataset used in
this work is composed of a total of 4923 sequences, each consisting of six nodes.
For validation, 20 % of the data set are randomly retained as a test set. The
remaining 80% are used to train the RNN.
View PDF
A comparative study for unsupervised network representation learning
Declaration of Competing Interest
When parsing the DEXPI files, it becomes apparent that the level of detail in the
P&ID description varies greatly depending on the user. Thus, different numbers of
attributes of the XML files are filled in. At the same time, the use of the
attributes leaves some room for interpretation, such that synonymous information
was mapped to different attributes. This requires a certain degree of robustness,
which has been considered in the DEXPI-2-graph implementation. Therefore, several
attributes (e.g. design temperature, pressure, material, …) are deliberately
searched until the desired information for the respective node is found.
v
Keywords
(7)
Volume 4, September 2022, 100038
View in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Terms and conditions
The need for data-driven modeling and optimization is growing in the process
industry due to increasing digitalization of processes and tools. Previous work
already shows an acceleration of process development by agent-based environments,
which can be understood as the first steps of intelligent process development
(Batres et al., 1997). Further work shows the potential for using intelligent
process information models by describing chemical plants and processes in terms of
a machine-readable format (e.g. colored petri nets), which enables accessibility
for deterministic algorithms (Zhao et al., 2005). This paper aims to develop
applications that accelerate the development of P&IDs using artificial intelligence
(AI). This requires an accelerated development and application of standardized and
machine-readable file exchange formats to ensure a sufficiently large and highly
available database for the application of AI in P&ID development. In the field of
P&IDs, the DEXPI (Data Exchange in Process Industry) standard is becoming
increasingly popular., as it enables the uniform description of P&IDs and ensures
the vendor-independent exchange of information (Theißen and Wiedau, 2021). At the
same time, DEXPI provides the possibility to be used as a platform for digital
plant data in process industry (Wiedau et al., 2019), which can significantly
reduce the development time of chemical and biotechnological production plants.
Additionally, interoperability increases due to the continuous integration of DEXPI
into existing engineering software (Fillinger et al., 2017).
M. Zaheer, S. Kottur, S. Ravanbakhsh, B. Poczos, R. Salakhutdinov, A. Smola
open access
Deep sets
Data augmentation for machine learning of chemical process flowsheets
LEARNING FROM FLOWSHEETS: A GENERATIVE TRANSFORMER MODEL FOR AUTOCOMPLETION OF
FLOWSHEETS
2022, arXiv
E. Strubell, A. Ganesh, A. McCallum
Tandoh Henry, Yi Cao
Chollet, 2020
Shopping cart
Google Scholar
It appears that the classes have an uneven distribution, which is unavoidable since
this data set is a representative cross-section of all components in a process
plant. In the context of this work, it is important to investigate to what extent
the unequal distribution of training data will affect the results of the
classification.
Show abstract
Piping equipment 41
Share
The design and engineering of piping and instrumentation diagrams (P&ID) is a very
time-consuming and labor-intensive process. Although P&IDs show common patterns
that could be reused during development, the drawing is usually created manually
and built up from scratch for each process. The aim of this paper is to recognize
these patterns with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) and to make them
available for the development and the drawing process of P&IDs. In order to achieve
this, P&ID data is made accessible for AI applications through the DEXPI format,
which is a machine-readable, manufacturer-independent exchange standard for P&IDs.
It is demonstrated how deep learning models trained with DEXPI P&ID data can
support the engineering as well as drawing of P&IDs and therefore decrease labor
time and costs. This is achieved by assisted prediction of equipment in P&IDs based
on recurrent neural networks as well as consistency checks based on graph neural
networks.
International Organization for Standardization, 2012b. ISO 10209, technical product
documentation – vocabulary – terms relating to technical drawings, product
definition and related documentation. Geneva.
International Organization for Standardization, 2013. ISO 15926-2 - industrial
automation systems and integration – integration of life-cycle data for process
plants including oil and gas production facilities – part 2: data model. Beuth
Verlag, Geneva.
Social Media
Wiedau et al., 2021
Google Scholar
Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery
and Data Mining, ACM, New York, NY, USA (2016), pp. 855-864,
10.1145/2939672.2939754
To better understand the modeling of plant topology by message passing GNNs, an
example is given in Fig. 7 that relates the aggregation of neighborhood information
to a snippet of a P&ID. The example shows the aggregation by a two-layer neural
network. Since the plant topology is to be learned, we focus in the following on
the equipment information, such as the classes of each component in the P&ID. Thus,
in a first step (k = 1), inferences can be made about the vessel based on the
information from the valve and the heat exchanger. In a second step (k = 2), a
valve's and a temperature sensor's information can be aggregated for the embedding
of the heat exchanger, while the valves´ embedding is influenced by the connected
drive and flow control.
Google Scholar
Acknowledgment
plumX logoView details
Khosla et al., 2020
Question answering system for chemistry—A semantic agent extension
(8)
The computational graph shown in Fig. 7 visualizes how it is possible to obtain
information of a component based on its neighborhood through the neural networks
AGGREGATE(k=1) and AGGREGATE(k=2). If the neighborhood components of the vessel are
known, it is possible to predict the class of the vessel or to analyze in a
consistency check how probable it is that a vessel is located at exactly this
position in the graph.
Table 1
We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content and ads.
By continuing you agree to the use of cookies.
V. Turau, C. Weyer
Google Scholar
InTech (2008), 10.5772/68
Digital Chemical Engineering, Volume 3, 2022, Article 100032
AI-based processing of P&IDs
Cho, K., van Merrienboer, B., Bahdanau, D., Bengio, Y., 2014. On the properties of
neural machine translation: encoder-decoder approaches. arXiv Prepr.
arXiv1409.1259.
Contact and support
Workflow – node prediction
RELX group home page
Chem. Ing. Tech., 93 (2021), pp. 2105-2115, 10.1002/cite.202100203
Google Scholar
The reduction of a graph to canonical form and the algebra which appears therein
Fillinger et al., 2017
Elsevier logo with wordmark
Show more
Vessels 75
Murphy, 2012
Weisfeiler and Leman, 1968
Manaswi, 2018
Google Scholar
b
l
arbitrary node in the neighborhood of node u
Google Scholar
© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Institution of Chemical
Engineers (IChemE).
Preprocessing – DEXPI-2-graph
length of the directed walks
weight by which the features of nodes influence each other
(2)
Proceedings of the NIPS (2017), p. 2017
In the second step, the structure of the node sequences is learned with the aid of
recurrent neural networks (RNN). For this purpose, four different approaches are
used: a simple RNN (Chen, 2021), a Bidirectional RNN (BRNN) (Schuster and Paliwal,
1997), a Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) (Cho et al., 2014) as well as a Long-short-
term memory (LSTM) (Hochreiter and Schmidhuber, 1997). An RNN, as shown in Fig. 5,
has an input layer, a hidden layer, and an output layer. The RNN represents a
replication of a neural network with the same dimensions. For each replication, a
state is transferred to the next layer. In this way it is possible to learn local
relationships in the sequences. Basically, RNNs have a disadvantage that should not
be underestimated. The training of weights by more distant information is
difficult, since their errors explode or diminish during the backpropagation.
(Chen, 2021) To get around this there are further possibilities such as the use of
BRNNs. These take into account future information in addition to previous
information to increase the accuracy (Schuster and Paliwal, 1997). Another option
is the use of GRUs or LSTMs. Both consists of single cells and using cell states
and gates to decide which information will be processed and which forgotten. This
allows to get the behavior of a short-term memory. GRUs consist of a reset and
update gate (Chen, 2021; Cho et al., 2014). A LSTM uses one input, one output, and
one forget gate. The gates control the information flow and decide, which
information is necessary to make a prediction. A kind of short-term memory is
created, which also gives the network its name (Chen, 2021; Hochreiter and
Schmidhuber, 1997). Both the GRU and the LSTM are used in state-of-the-art deep
learning applications. GRUs have fewer tensor operations, which leads to faster
training. For this reason, they are used for modeling in this paper to investigate
which of them leads to better results for predicting P&ID equipment based on
sequential data.
Proteus XML, 2017. Proteus schema for P&ID exchange [WWW Document]. URL
https://github.com/ProteusXML/proteusxml (accessed 5.18.22).
layer of a GNN / iteration step in message passing
Google Scholar
input
A. Gulli, S. Pal
Algorithmische Graphentheorie, De Gruyter Studium
Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate
Turau and Weyer, 2015
Google Scholar
The sequential node prediction can be divided into three parts and its workflow is
shown in Fig. 5.
Chen, 2021
2022, arXiv
To quantify how well GNNs are suited to classify individual pieces of equipment
based on their location in the P&ID topology, the recursive GNN presented in
chapter 3 is trained with the P&ID graphs presented before. For this purpose, the
models were implemented and trained using the Deep Graph Library (version 0.7.2)
with PyTorch framework in Python (version 3.7). The calculations were performed on
an Intel® Xeon® W-2155 (3.31 GHz) CPU in combination with 128 GB RAM. The
aggregation functions listed previously are used in the GNN and compared against
each other. The prediction accuracy is used as an evaluation metric, which was
defined in chapter 3.2. For the examined models, the accuracy is shown below in
Fig. 9.
Google Scholar
Citations
About ScienceDirect
To check how well the classification can be performed for the different classes,
the confusion matrix of the model with sum aggregation using the test data set is
also considered, see Fig. 10. The columns in the matrix describe the predicted
classes, while the rows represent the real classes. Consequently, the main diagonal
displays the number of correctly classified components (TP).
Google Scholar
Batres et al., 1997
node2vec
Modified smith predictor for slug control with large valve stroke time in unstable
systems
AI Open, 1 (2020), pp. 57-81, 10.1016/j.aiopen.2021.01.001
Tables (1)
u
Chollet, F., 2020. Keras API - documentation vers. 2.4.0 [WWW Document]. URL
https://keras.io (accessed 2.20.22).
Download : Download high-res image (310KB)
Process. Saf. Environ. Prot., 83 (2005), pp. 509-532, 10.1205/psep.04055
Check valves 60
Further opportunities are safety assessment and HAZOP studies, where machine-
readable HAZOP scenarios could be mapped to graph-based plant topologies using
search algorithms. Furthermore, in future a possible detection of subgraphs in
P&IDs i.e. functional equipment assemblies could facilitate the mapping between PFD
simulations based on unit operations and P&IDs. This could provide the foundation
for automated generation of PFD simulations from a DEXPI plant topology.
Digital Chemical Engineering
Node classification using graph neural networks
Cited by (4)
Wiedau et al., 2019
Fig. 6. Results of the training of following P&ID equipment with different RNN
models
Bidirectional recurrent neural networks
CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)
m
C. Zhao, M. Bhushan, V. Venkatasubramanian
arbitrary node u of a graph
L. Chen
Fig 3
Acknowledgment
Cited By (4)
(Bahdanau et al., 2014).
In the following, several P&IDs in the standardized DEXPI format are used as
training data, which were exported using the program PlantEngineer from the
software vendor X-Visual Technologies GmbH and converted to graphs in GraphML
format (GraphML Project Group, 2017) according to chapter 2.1. In total, 35 P&ID
graphs from third parties (laboratory and industrial plants) with 1641 nodes and
1410 edges are used. The data set contains 92 different equipment classes (valves,
pumps, vessels, instrumentation, etc.) based on the DEXPI specifications (Theißen
and Wiedau, 2021) and has three different classes of edges (pipes, signal lines,
process connection lines). The ratio of nodes/edges shows that, as expected for
P&IDs, these are very linear graphs with rather low connectivity structures. At a
closer look there are usually many single nodes along a pipeline (e.g. valves,
vessels, pumps, heat exchangers, measuring points, etc.) which results in a kind of
dead ends. Additionally, some P&IDs show inconsistencies in their drawn structures,
which in some cases lead to isolated nodes or several, smaller graphs. However,
these inconsistencies were deliberately included in the data set, as the data is
intended to represent the current state of machine-readable P&IDs in the process
industry to obtain representative results. The influence of the inconsistencies on
the results is examined in more detail in chapter 4.
Results - GNN node classification
View PDF
The results show that RNNs are generally able to learn patterns in sequences from
P&ID graphs. It is noticeable that the SimpleRNN provides the best results with a
validation accuracy of 78.36%. In the case, where the equipment is part of the five
most likely predictions, even 95.2% accuracy is achieved. The BRNN reaches an
accuracy of 94.39%, while predicting the five most suitable equipment types. The
LSTM and GRU have slightly lower accuracy, suggesting that the effect of the
diminishing gradient for the short sequences involved does not have a significant
effect on the training. At the same time, it should be noted that training for the
GRU took less than one-third the time of a SimpleRNN model. Given the current small
amount of data, this is not a decisive factor with the current setting. However,
should the training of the models be done in the future on large data sets or
continuously, it is recommended to give more attention to this aspect, as the use
of GRUs or LSTMs can save time and resources (Strubell et al., 2019), which should
be considered with respect to a sustainable process development.
hu
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dche.2022.100038
Oeing, J., 2022. DEXPI2graph converter application [WWW Document]. URL
https://github.com/TUDoAD/DEXPI2graphML (accessed 5.18.22).
Download : Download full-size image
Mathematically, the message passing of an GNN (Eq. (2)) can be described as follows
(Hamilton, 2020):
Captures
To verify the feasibility, a node classification based on a GraphSAGE model is
applied in the following. GraphSAGE (Hamilton, 2020; Hamilton et al., 2017; Khosla
et al., 2020) is a GNN, which is characterized by a good generalization for unseen
structures in graphs (Hamilton et al., 2017), which makes it particularly suitable
for the currently small amount of machine-readable P&ID data. A challenging aspect
is that GraphSAGE aggregates information of all nodes including the target node.
This becomes a problem if the equipment class is part of the aggregated features,
since the own equipment class is aggregated. This inevitably leads to an accuracy
of 100%, too, since the GNN can read the information in the node. In the case of a
consistency check, this does not make sense, since the information is available but
must not serve as input for the network, since this is what is to be checked.
Hence, it is essential that the features of the target node are not aggregated, but
only their neighborhood. The remedy is a recursive neural network, which was
modified from the GraphSAGE algorithm. For this purpose, a calculation rule (3) is
used, which considers in a case distinction whether information of a node should be
included for aggregation. Mathematically the variation can be described as follows,
where in contrast to the classical GraphSAGE (Hamilton et al., 2017) it has to be
recognized that the model determines the embedding from the starting parameter
View in ScopusGoogle Scholar
View PDFView articleView in ScopusGoogle Scholar
4
Neural Comput., 9 (1997), pp. 1735-1780, 10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735
Abbreviations
Fig 7
(6)
Xu et al., 2019
Graph representation learning
Sequential node prediction using recurrent neural networks
Conclusion & outlook
Proceedings of the ICLR (2014), p. 2015
4
The recursive GNN is used based on the GraphSAGE algorithm presented in the
previous chapter 4. The number of layers is k = 3. For the activation function, the
ReLU function (Manaswi, 2018) and a subsequent normalization are applied. To
achieve the most efficient prediction accuracy, different state-of-the-art
aggregation functions are used and compared against each other. Basic variants in
this respect are the calculation of a sum (4) or an arithmetic mean (5) (Grabisch
et al., 2009).
Proceedings of the NIPS (2017), p. 17
ArXiv ID 1412.6980
Fig 5
Tweets:
View PDFView articleView in ScopusGoogle Scholar
Recommended articles
Article Metrics