Optimization of Rubber Seed Oil Transesterification to Biodiesel Using Experimental Designs and Artificial Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of biofuels is driven both by concern about the greenhouse effect and by interest in the opportunities for exploitation of biomass of agricultural origin. In order to improve the yield and quality of biodiesel through modeling and optimization, several studies are in progress. In this paper, biodiesel produced from rubber seed oil in the homogeneous transesterification is studied using a Plackett-Burman experimental design, a full factorial design, a central composite design and an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) coupled with a Genetic Algorithm (GA).Variables such as temperature, stirring speed, reaction time, type of alcohol, and type of catalyst are studied to obtain the best specific gravity and kinematic viscosity. Type of alcohol and type of catalyst have the greatest effect on the two responses, with ethanol (alcohol) and sulphuric acid (catalyst) producing the best results. The specific gravity and kinematic viscosity changes recorded during the transesterification process followed the first and second order polynomial models, respectively. The ANN coupled with GA was used to optimize the two responses simultaneously. Global optimal values of specific gravity (0.883) and kinematic viscosity (6.76 cSt) were recorded when a temperature of 90°C, a stirring speed of 305 rpm, and a treatment time of 141 min were imposed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".