MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105801133 · doi:10.3808/jei.200400025

A Mixed-Integer Optimization Model for Compressor Selection in Natural Gas Pipeline Network System Operations

2004· article· en· W2105801133 on OpenAlexafffundabout
V. Uraikul

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Informatics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCompressor stationGas compressorPipeline (software)Natural gasInteger programmingEngineeringPipeline transportMathematical optimizationMechanical engineeringWaste managementMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) model to optimize the compressor selection operations in natural gas pipeline network system. The objectives of natural gas pipeline network system operations are to minimize the operation costs and provide sufficient gas to the local customers. A pipeline network system is the most cost effective way for moving fluid products over long distances. In this case, it is used for transmitting natural gas from a producer to customers. To ensure demand for natural gas can be met, a dispatcher turns on or off compressor(s) in order to increase or decrease the amount of natural gas in the pipeline system. Compressor selection is one of the most critical operations in the natural gas pipeline network system because the costs associated with turning on or off the compressor make up a large percentage of the total operating costs. In order to minimize the operating costs of the pipeline system, the three most crucial factors that affect the costs are integrated into the MILP model. The three factors include the capacities of compressors, the energy used to turn on the compressors, and the energy used to turn them off. The MILP model provides the decision support in determining the optimal solutions for controlling the compressors. It was developed and verified using the operation data supplied by a gas pipeline company in Saskatchewan, Canada.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental InformaticsSame topicProcess Optimization and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207