MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086292865 · doi:10.3390/en13184787

An Artificial Neural Network for the Low-Cost Prediction of Soot Emissions

2020· article· en· W3086292865 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehdi Jadidi, Stevan Kostic, Leonardo Zimmer, Seth B. Dworkin

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSootCombustionArtificial neural networkLaminar flowComputational fluid dynamicsCombustorComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceMechanicsEngineeringChemistryAerospace engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soot formation in combustion systems is a growing concern due to its adverse environmental and health effects. It is considered to be a tremendously complicated phenomenon which includes multiphase flow, thermodynamics, heat transfer, chemical kinetics, and particle dynamics. Although various numerical approaches have been developed for the detailed modeling of soot evolution, most industrial device simulations neglect or rudimentarily approximate soot formation due to its high computational cost. Developing accurate, easy to use, and computationally inexpensive numerical techniques to predict or estimate soot concentrations is a major objective of the combustion industry. In the present study, a supervised Artificial Neural Network (ANN) technique is applied to predict the soot concentration fields in ethylene/air laminar diffusion flames accurately with a low computational cost. To gather validated data, eight different flames with various equivalence ratios, inlet velocities, and burner geometries are modeled using the CoFlame code (a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) parallel combustion and soot model) and the Lagrangian histories of soot-containing fluid parcels are computed and stored. Then, an ANN model is developed and optimized using the Levenberg-Marquardt approach. Two different scenarios are introduced to validate the network performance; testing the prediction capabilities of the network for the same eight flames that are used to train the network, and for two new flames that are not within the training data set. It is shown that for both of these cases the ANN is able to predict the overall soot concentration field very well with a relatively low integrated error.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207