Robust optimization of a multiscale heterogeneous catalytic reactor system with spatially‐varying uncertainty descriptions using polynomial chaos expansions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper explores the effects of spatially‐varying parametric uncertainty on the performance of a heterogeneous catalytic flow reactor system. The catalytic reactor behaviour is simulated using a spatially‐dependent multiscale model that combines kinetic Monte Carlo (kMC) with continuum transport equations to capture the relevant phenomena on the scales in which they occur. Polynomial chaos expansions (PCEs) are implemented to effectively propagate parametric uncertainty through the reactor model. These expansions are used to perform uncertainty analysis on the catalytic reactor system in order to accurately and effectively evaluate and compare the effects of spatially‐constant and spatially‐varying uncertainty distributions. The uncertainty comparison is further extended through application to robust optimization. To reduce the computational cost of the optimization, statistical data‐driven models (DDMs) are identified to approximate the key statistical parameters (mean, variance, and probabilistic bounds) of the reactor output variability for each uncertainty description. The DDMs are incorporated into robust optimization formulations that maximize the reactor productivity and minimize the output variability subject to parametric uncertainty. The results demonstrate the impact of spatially‐varying parametric uncertainty on the catalytic reactor performance and highlight the importance of its inclusion to adequately account for phenomena such as catalyst fouling in robust optimization and process improvement studies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".