MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772538237 · doi:10.1002/aic.16045

Multilevel Monte Carlo applied to chemical engineering systems subject to uncertainty

2017· article· en· W2772538237 on OpenAlexafffund
Grigoriy Kimaev, Luis Ricardez‐Sandoval

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodUncertainty quantificationSampling (signal processing)Polynomial chaosLatin hypercube samplingEngineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to evaluate the performance of Multilevel Monte Carlo (MLMC) sampling technique for uncertainty quantification in chemical engineering systems. Three systems (a mixing tank, a wastewater treatment plant, and a ternary distillation column, all subject to uncertainty) were considered. The expected values of the systems' observables were estimated using MLMC, Power Series and Polynomial Chaos expansions, and standard Monte Carlo (MC) sampling. The MLMC technique achieved results of significantly greater accuracy than other methods at a lower computational cost than standard MC. This study highlights the nuances of adapting the MLMC technique to chemical engineering systems and the advantages of using MLMC for uncertainty quantification. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 64: 1651–1661, 2018

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207