MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901630139 · doi:10.1002/ese3.252

Multi‐objective performance optimization of irreversible molten carbonate fuel cell–Stirling heat engine–reverse osmosis and thermodynamic assessment with ecological objective approach

2018· article· en· W2901630139 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Science & Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersWuhan University of TechnologyWuhan UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Hubei ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsExergy efficiencyProcess engineeringStirling engineMulti-objective optimizationMolten carbonate fuel cellTOPSISExergyDesalinationWaste heatThermal efficiencyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematical optimizationMechanical engineeringEngineeringHeat exchangerMathematicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper aims to investigate a hybrid cycle consisting of a molten carbonate fuel cell (FC) and a Stirling engine which, by connecting to a seawater reverse osmosis desalination unit, provides fresh water. First, a parametric evaluation is performed to study the effect of some key parameters, including the current density and the working temperature of the FC and the thermal conductance between the working substance and the heat reservoirs in the Stirling engine, on the objective functions. The objective functions include the energy efficiency, the exergy destruction rate density, the fresh water production rate, and the ecological function density. After investigating each double combination of these objective functions, two scenarios are defined in quest to concurrently optimize three functions together. The first scenario aims to optimize the energy efficiency, the exergy destruction rate density, and the fresh water production rate; and the second scenario attempts to optimize the energy efficiency, the fresh water production rate, and the ecological function density. A multi‐objective evolutionary algorithm joined with the nondominated sorting genetic algorithm ( NSGA ‐ II ) approach is employed to obtain Pareto fronts in each case scenario. In order to ascertain final solutions between Pareto fronts, three fast and robust decision‐making methods are employed including TOPSIS , LINMAP , and Fuzzy. Finally, a sensitivity analysis is conducted to critically analyze the performance of the system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.472
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.183 · 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