MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039500187 · doi:10.4271/2020-01-2017

A Machine Learning Modeling Approach for High Pressure Direct Injection Dual Fuel Compressed Natural Gas Engines

2020· article· en· W3039500187 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Karpinski-Leydier, Ryozo Nagamune, Patrick Kirchen

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed natural gasDual (grammatical number)Natural gasComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringNatural (archaeology)Mechanical engineeringEngineeringWaste managementGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">The emissions and efficiency of modern internal combustion engines need to be improved to reduce their environmental impact. Many strategies to address this (e.g., alternative fuels, exhaust gas aftertreatment, novel injection systems, etc.) require engine calibrations to be modified, involving extensive experimental data collection. A new approach to modeling and data collection is proposed to expedite the development of these new technologies and to reduce their upfront cost. This work evaluates a Gaussian Process Regression, Artificial Neural Network and Bayesian Optimization based strategy for the efficient development of machine learning models, intended for engine optimization and calibration. The objective of this method is to minimize the size of the required experimental data set and reduce the associated data collection cost for engine modeling.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">This technique is demonstrated by generating engine performance models for a Dual Fuel High Pressure Direct Injection (HPDI) CNG Engine. Models are generated for the emissions and performance of a pilot ignited, direct injection, natural gas engine using only typical control inputs (e.g.: speed, injection timings, and fuel and air pressures). This modeling technique is first demonstrated on a full-factorial data set collected over a narrow operating space and then compared to a much coarser data set collected over a much larger space using the Box-Behnken approach.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Ten sets of neural network and Gaussian process regression models were generated for each engine output. The aggregated model results demonstrate that the machine learning models perform very well for the full factorial data set with correlation coefficients generally over 0.8 and normalized root mean square errors generally under 10%, while the response surface model is unable to characterize the outputs due to the size of the data. While there is a loss in performance using the coarser Box-Behnken data set, the machine learning methods do show some strong results for certain outputs. Models for NO<sub>X</sub>, CO<sub>2</sub>, O<sub>2</sub>, Peak Cylinder Pressure, EQR and Gross Indicated Power have R<sup>2</sup> greater than 0.8 and normalized root mean square errors less than 20%. In general, Gaussian process regression shows the higher performing results with less performance variation over multiple tests compared to the neural network models. With further study, this method could enable the rapid evaluation and implementation of technologies and fuels for emission reduction.</div></div>

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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207