MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995572858 · doi:10.5539/mas.v3n1p108

On the Comparison of Capacitance-Based Tomography Data Normalization Methods for Multilayer Perceptron Recognition of Gas-Oil Flow Patterns

2008· article· en· W1995572858 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hafizah Talib, Junita Mohamad–Saleh, Khursiah Zainal-Mokhtar, Najwan Osman–Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoKementerian Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)Electrical capacitance tomographyPattern recognition (psychology)CapacitanceArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkComputer sciencePerceptronMultilayer perceptronPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Normalization is important for Electrical Capacitance Tomography (ECT) data due to the very small capacitance values obtained either from the physical or simulated ECT system. Thus far, there are two commonly used normalization methods for ECT, but their suitability has not been investigated. This paper presents the work on comparing the performances of two Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) neural networks; one trained based on ECT data normalized using the conventional equation and the other normalized using the improved equation, to recognize gas-oil flow patterns. The correct pattern recognition percentages for both MLPs were calculated and compared. The results showed that the MLP trained with the conventional ECT normalization equation out-performed the ones trained with the improved normalization data for the task of gas-oil pattern recognition.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207