Evolutionary design of optimum distillation column sequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Synthesis of the optimum distillation column sequence (DCS), which incorporates a huge search space composed of both conventional and complex arrangements, is a highly complicated combinatorial problem in the field of chemical process design and optimisation. In this study, a novel procedure for the synthesis of optimum DCS proposed by Boozarjomehry et al. [Boozarjomehry et al., Can. J. Chem. Eng. 87, 477–492 (2009)] is expanded to include the complex distillation arrangements. The method is based on evolutionary algorithms, and the total annual cost (TAC) is the main criterion used to screen alternatives. Efficient procedure has been proposed for encoding mechanism to include and classify various complex arrangements together with conventional distillation columns. All columns existing in each DCS alternative are designed using the most recommended short‐cut methods to estimate the TAC of the DCS. Four standard benchmark case studies are carried out to clearly demonstrate the excellent performance of the proposed method. The produced results for these problems indicate that the proposed method outperforms the other existing approaches in terms of flexibility, accuracy and comprehensiveness. © 2011 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".