MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077763051 · doi:10.2202/1542-6580.1832

A Neural Network Approach for Identification and Modeling of Delayed Coking Plant

2009· article· en· W2077763051 on OpenAlexaff
Gholamreza Zahedi, Ali Lohi, Zohre Karami

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCoal and Coke Industries Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkMultilayer perceptronRadial basis functionEstimatorPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceIdentification (biology)Artificial intelligenceGeneralizationStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, an artificial neural network (ANN) modeling of a delayed coking unit (DCU) is proposed. Different data from various DCU have been collected. Feed API and Cat Cracker (CCR) weight percent have been considered as network inputs. Coke, output CCR, light gases, gasoline, gas-oil and C5+ weight percents are the network outputs. 70 percent of the data have been used for training of ANN. Among the Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) architectures a network with 31 hidden neurons has been found as best MLP predictor. Radial Basis Function (RBF) also has been implemented for identification of the plant. An RBF network with 20 spread was found as best estimator of the DCU. Best RBF network and best MLP network performance in prediction of 30 percent of unseen data were compared. It was found that RBF method has the best generalization capability and was used in DCU modeling.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor EngineeringSame topicCoal and Coke Industries ResearchFrench-language works237,207