MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004664527 · doi:10.1002/aic.11614

A new look at optimal control of a batch crystallizer

2008· article· en· W2004664527 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimple (philosophy)Nonlinear systemModel predictive controlOptimization problemSequence (biology)Optimal controlControl theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationHorizonMetastabilityControl (management)Computer scienceEngineeringMathematicsChemistryPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The dynamic optimization of batch crystallizers has been widely studied. A simplified method of optimization inspired from nonlinear model predictive control with a receding horizon is introduced and tested on many different objective functions with various constraints. The proposed optimization method with a receding horizon gives excellent results with no noticeable difference from those obtained by rigorous dynamic optimization and is well adapted to online dynamic optimization. Two different crystallizer models are compared. It is shown that the dynamic optimization problem is constituted of several subproblems related to the constraints on the crystallizer temperature, on the concentration compared to the metastable concentration or on the final moments. Finally, the authors propose simple online control algorithms that result in quasi‐optimal temperature profiles provided that the type and sequence of arcs have been previously determined. This method is well adapted to industrial situations. © 2008 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J, 2008

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.183 · 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