MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023477124 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20194

Enhanced model predictive control of a catalytic flow reversal reactor

2009· article· en· W2023477124 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christophe Devals, Adrian Fuxman, François Bertrand, J. Fraser Forbes, Pascal Perrier, Robert E. Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethaneModel predictive controlContinuous stirred-tank reactorPlug flow reactor modelVolumetric flow rateCombustionInertCatalysisInletEnergy balanceCatalytic combustionChemistryControl theory (sociology)Nuclear engineeringMechanicsThermodynamicsEngineeringComputer sciencePhysicsPhysical chemistryControl (management)Mechanical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The combustion of lean methane air mixtures in a catalytic flow reversal reactor (CFRR) is studied using a two dimensional heterogeneous continuum model, based on mole and energy balance equations for the solid (the inert and catalytic sections of the reactor) and the fluid phases. Following a design of experiments (DOE), many simulations were carried out to investigate the reactor performance. The results show the impact on the methane conversion and the maximum temperature in the reactor of key process parameters such as the methane inlet concentration, the superficial gas velocity, the switching time, and the mass extraction rate. A simple empirical model is deduced to predict the maximum temperature and conversion of methane in the reactor at stationary state. This model is combined with a model predictive control (MPC) strategy in the form of a terminal constraint to improve the controller performance. Results show that the control of the reactor is improved.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207