MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041036705 · doi:10.1177/1468087420936949

A correlation-based model order reduction approach for a diesel engine NO <sub>x</sub> and brake mean effective pressure dynamic model using machine learning

2020· article· en· W3041036705 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Engine Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsSupport vector machineReduction (mathematics)Model order reductionMean effective pressureDiesel engineArtificial neural networkAlgorithmRelevance vector machineNonlinear systemArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMachine learningEngineeringMathematicsAutomotive engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A correlation-based model order reduction algorithm is developed using support vector machine to model [Formula: see text] emission and break mean effective pressure of a medium-duty diesel engine. The support vector machine–based model order reduction algorithm is used to reduce the number of features of a 34-feature full-order model by evaluating the regression performance of the support vector machine–based model. Then, the support vector machine–based model order reduction algorithm is used to reduce the number of features of the full-order model. Two models for [Formula: see text] emission and break mean effective pressure are developed via model order reduction, one complex model with high accuracy, called high-order model, and the other with an acceptable accuracy and a simple structure, called low-order model. The high-order model has 29 features for [Formula: see text] and 20 features for break mean effective pressure, while the low-order model has nine features for [Formula: see text] and six features for break mean effective pressure. Then, the steady-state low-order model and high-order model are implemented in a nonlinear control-oriented model. To verify the accuracy of nonlinear control-oriented model, a fast response electrochemical [Formula: see text] sensor is used to experimentally study the engine transient [Formula: see text] emissions. The high-order model and low-order model support vector machine models of [Formula: see text] and break mean effective pressure are compared to a conventional artificial neural network with one hidden layer. The results illustrate that the developed support vector machine model has shorter training times (5–14 times faster) and higher accuracy especially for test data compared to the artificial neural network model. A control-oriented model is then developed to predict the dynamic behavior of the system. Finally, the performance of the low-order model and high-order model is evaluated for different rising and falling input transients at four different engine speeds. The transient test results validate the high accuracy of the high-order model and the acceptable accuracy of low-order model for both [Formula: see text] and break mean effective pressure. The high-order model is proposed as an accurate virtual plant while the low-order model is suitable for model-based controller design.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.291 · 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