Skip to content
GAIAA, Intelligence, engineered
Solutions
Solutions overviewBuild, deploy and improve AI systems that deliver real value.Private AI infrastructureRun private AI securely in your infrastructure.Existing AI optimizationMake existing AI faster, more reliable and more valuable.
Main specializations
Computer VisionSmart CityLIMSIndustrial IoT
IndustriesCase StudiesAbout usBlogContact
ENPL
Solutions
Solutions overviewPrivate AI infrastructureExisting AI optimization
Main specializations
Computer VisionSmart CityLIMSIndustrial IoT
IndustriesCase StudiesAbout usBlogContact
ENPL
GAIAA, Intelligence, engineered

Your signals, systems and constraints become the starting point for AI that can work in the real world.

Solutions overviewIndustriesCase StudiesAbout usBlogContact

Bring a process, signal or recurring decision.

Start the conversation
GAIAA sp. z o.o. sp.k.
ul. Sofoklesa 17
60-461 Poznań, Poland
NIP: 7811993317
KRS: 0000777888
© 2026 GAIAAPrivacy policyhello@gaiaa.eu+48 666 308 008LinkedIn
ENPL

Case study: Laboratories & science

A control chart is only useful when the observations are truly comparable.

Governed observation populations, limits and rules turned charts into traceable quality decisions.

SystemOutcomesRelated workDiscuss your case

System

The project and the problem

The laboratory wanted statistical process control to distinguish routine variation from isolated quality events and gradual drift. Drawing a chart was not the difficult part: measurements sharing a parameter name could come from different processes, materials, instruments or methods and therefore be scientifically incomparable. Using only today's control limits would also reinterpret historical alerts whenever those limits changed.

How the process worked

The I-MR plan fixed the recipe, chamber, measurement method and approved baseline before evaluation. Every event retained its original limit set, rule set and engine version; reviewers could inspect the supporting observation and open an investigation without recalculating history.

SPC event review

Review the signal. Preserve the evidence.

SPC event review

SPC-017 v4 · ALD witness-coupon thickness

Individuals and moving range · approved plan

Action required · Rule 1EVAL-1048 · Evaluated 30 Aug · 10:43 CEST
Comparable population

POP-017-04

Response
Mean film thickness · nm
Process
ALD-R12 v3
Equipment
ALD-03
Witness
200 mm silicon coupon
Measurement
ELL-02 · ELL-THK-07 v5
31 included3 excluded
  • RUN-2477 · chamber ALD-05
  • RUN-2478 · method ELL-THK-06
  • RUN-2479 · result awaiting approval
Official evaluation

Thickness control history

UCL
53.2
CL
50.1
LCL
47.0
EVT-1048 · Rule 1 · observation window OBS-0020 to OBS-0031
Twelve comparable ALD witness-coupon thickness observations in nanometres. Centre line 50.1, upper control limit 53.2 and lower control limit 47.0. Nelson Rule 1: One point beyond the upper control limit. Selected observation OBS-0031, 54.0 nanometres. An ALD-03 chamber clean is marked between RUN-2505 and RUN-2506.47505355UCLCLLCLALD-03 cleanRule 1 · 54.0 nm000102030405060708091011Thickness (nm)Run sequenceMoving ranges derived from consecutive included observations. Centre line 1.17 nanometres and upper control limit 3.81 nanometres.024UCLMRMR (nm)
Observation
OBS-0031
Run
RUN-2511
Witness
S-2197-D
Result
54.0 nm
Measured
30 Aug · 10:42 CEST
Rule event

EVT-1048

Action required · Rule 1
Nelson Rule 1
One point beyond the upper control limit

OBS-0031 measured 54.0 nm against the LS-04 upper control limit of 53.2 nm.

Support
OBS-0031
Limit set
LS-04
Rule set
NR-02
Measurement
MEAS-24096 · approved
Raw artifact
ELL02_20260830_RUN-2511_THK.csv
Integrity
SHA-256 9f3a7c1e…d2f6
Instrument
ELL-02 · ELL-THK-07 v5
Calibration
CAL-ELL02-1142 · valid at acquisition
Process
RUN-2511 · ALD-R12 v3 · ALD-03
Population
POP-017-04
Baseline
BL-2026-02
Limits
LS-04
Rules
NR-02
Engine
SPC-EVAL 2.3
Evaluation
EVAL-1048

Outcomes

Operating constraints

  1. Comparable populations
  2. Frozen evaluation versions
  3. Control-limit provenance
  4. Investigation evidence

What changed?

  1. Faster signal review
  2. Reproducible evaluations
  3. Point-to-source evidence
  4. Quality decisions preserved

Evidence retained: Each signal retained its observation, population definition, control limits, rule set and evaluation version.

Related work

SolutionLIMS

Discuss your case

Have a similar operating problem? Share the environment, constraint and result you need. We can discuss the engineering path without exposing confidential details.

Discuss a similar challenge