Application of Central Force Optimization Method to Design Transient Protection Devices for Water Transmission Pipelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major challenges in designing under pressure water transmission pipeline is the system protection against water-hammer pressures due to a pump trip. The best strategy is to use air-chamber; which imposes considerable costs. To mitigate the air-chamber volume, the use of air-inletvalvesis also suggested. Determination of air-chamber volume as well as the type and proper locations of air-inlet valves, aiming at the cost reduction, introduces an optimization problem. To solve this problem, this study exploitsthe central force optimization (CFO) method. Herein, a case study pipeline is optimized using the proposed model based on the CFO and is compared with results of a genetic algorithm (GA) based model. Both methods yielded almost the same results and led to about 30% saving in the system protection cost. However, a comparison between the methods showed that the CFO dramaticallyoutperforms GA in both terms of computational efficiency and reliability of the results.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".