MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3106742432 · doi:10.18280/jesa.530510

Auto-Control Technique Using Gradient Method Based on Radial Basis Function Neural Networks to Control of an Activated Sludge Process of Wastewater Treatment

2020· article· en· W3106742432 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdallah Lemita, S. Boulahbel, Sami Kahla, Moussa Sedraoui

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivated sludgeWastewaterArtificial neural networkSewage treatmentAerationRadial basis functionGradient descentComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringWaste managementArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration is a key variable in the activated sludge wastewater treatment processes. In this paper, an auto control strategy based on Euler method and gradient method with radial basis function (RBF) neural networks (NNs) is proposed to solve the DO concentration control problem in an activated sludge process of wastewater treatment. The control purpose is to maintain the dissolved oxygen concentration in the aerated tank for having the substrate concentration within the standard limits established by legislation of wastewater treatment. For that reason, a new proposed control strategy based on gradient descent method and RBF neural network has been used. Compared with RBF neural network PI control, the obtained results show the effectiveness in terms of both transient and steady performances of proposed control method for dissolved oxygen control in the activated sludge wastewater treatment processes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.236 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés→Same topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal→French-language works237,207→