MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3174966489 · doi:10.4271/2021-24-0081

Estimation of Speciation Data for Hydrocarbons using Data Science

2021· article· en· W3174966489 on OpenAlexaff
Kiran K. Yalamanchi, Bingjie Chen, Rooppesh Sarankapani, S. Mani Sarathy

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEstimationGenetic algorithmData miningData scienceEngineeringSystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strict regulations on air pollution motivates clean combustion research for fossil fuels. To numerically mimic real gasoline fuel reactivity, surrogates are proposed to facilitate advanced engine design and predict emissions by chemical kinetic modelling. However, chemical kinetic models could not accurately predict non-regular emissions, e.g. aldehydes, ketones and unsaturated hydrocarbons, which are important air pollutants. In this work, we propose to use machine-learning algorithms to achieve better predictions. Combustion chemistry of fuels constituting of 10 neat fuels, 6 primary reference fuels (PRF) and 6 FGX surrogates were tested in a jet stirred reactor. Experimental data were collected in the same setup to maintain data uniformity and consistency under following conditions: residence time at 1.0 second, fuel concentration at 0.25%, equivalence ratio at 1.0, and temperature range from 750 to 1100K. Measured species profiles of methane, ethylene, propylene, hydrogen, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are used for machine-learning model development. The model considers both chemical effects and physical conditions. Chemical effects are described as different functional groups, viz. primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary carbons in molecular structures, and physical conditions as temperature. Both the Machine-learning models used in this study showed a good prediction accuracy with a test set regression score of 97.75 for support vector regression and 91.07 for random forest regression. This finding shows the great potential of machine learning application on combustion chemistry. By expanding the experimental database, machine-learning models can be further applied to many other hydrocarbons in future work.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series→Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→