Optimal design of large‐scale chemical processes under uncertainty: A ranking‐based approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An approach for the optimal design of chemical processes in the presence of uncertainty was presented. The key idea in this work is to approximate the process constraint functions and model outputs using Power Series Expansions (PSE)‐based functions. The PSE functions are used to efficiently identify the variability in the process constraint functions and model outputs due to multiple realizations in the uncertain parameters using Monte Carlo (MC) sampling methods. A ranking‐based approach is adopted here where the user can assign priorities or probabilities of satisfaction for the different process constraints and model outputs considered in the analysis. The methodology was tested on a reactor–heat exchanger system and the Tennessee Eastman process. The results show that the present method is computationally attractive since the optimal process design is accomplished in shorter computational times when compared to the use of the MC method applied to the full plant model. © 2014 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 60: 3243–3257, 2014
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it