MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024190040 · doi:10.1002/ente.201200056

Prediction of Equilibrium Conditions for Hydrate Formation in Binary Gaseous Systems Using Artificial Neural Networks

2013· article· en· W2024190040 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Reza Moradi, K. Nazari, Saman Alavi, M. Mohaddesi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSteacie Institute for Molecular SciencesUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSigmoid functionArtificial neural networkBinary numberTransfer functionBiological systemHydrocarbon mixturesClathrate hydrateHydrateThermodynamicsComputer scienceHydrocarbonChemistryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present work attempts to indicate the potential of artificial neural networks (ANN) for the fast and reliable estimation of the equilibrium conditions of single, binary, and multiple hydrocarbon gas hydrates. The ANN used in this study was a network with the tangent‐sigmoid (tansig) propagation transfer function in the hidden layer and a final layer with the linear (purelin) transfer function. The number of hidden neurons has been determined by minimizing the error of the calculation. The obtained results and the ANN model reliability were compared with other predictive methods. Results showed that the ANN method is able to reliably predict the hydrate equilibrium conditions of hydrocarbons, particularly for binary gas systems, using simple input parameters such as the weight fractions and normal boiling points of the components.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations18
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy TechnologySame topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207