MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200163179 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2021-26xgh

Experimental validation of an adsorbent-agnostic artificial neural network (ANN) framework for the design and optimization of cyclic adsorption processes

2021· preprint· en· W4200163179 on OpenAlexafffund
Kasturi Nagesh Pai, Tai Nguyen, Vinay Prasad, Arvind Rajendran

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Gas Emission Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersInnotech AlbertaCanada First Research Excellence FundUniversity of AlbertaCompute Canada
KeywordsSurrogate modelAdsorptionArtificial neural networkProcess (computing)Process engineeringProcess optimizationPorosityDesign of experimentsBiological systemMaterials scienceComputer scienceChromatographyMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEngineeringChemistryStatisticsChemical engineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficacy of an adsorbent agnostic machine-learning surrogate model for rapid design and optimization of a Skarstrom cycle vacuum swing adsorption (VSA) process is experimentally validated. The surrogate model is trained to predict the process performance using adsorbent features that include hypothetical Langmuir adsorption isotherm parameters, particle density, porosity and bed voidage, and process variables such as pressure, step duration and feed velocity. The training data was generated from a detailed process model for 20,000 unique combinations of the training variables. The model shows high accuracy of R2adj>0.99 for predicting key performance parameters such as product purity, recovery and productivity. The ability of this surrogate to predict the experimental performance for the purification of O2 from the air on two adsorbents, namely 13X and LiX zeolites, was studied. Two separate multi-objective optimization studies, to maximize purity and recovery, and to maximize productivity and purity were performed. For these optimization studies, the volumetrically measured isotherms of N2 and O2 were used as inputs to the surrogate model. Note that these isotherms were not a part of the dataset used to train the model. Nine points were chosen from the Parteo curves and the corresponding decision variables were used as set-points in a two-column lab-scale rig. The average difference between the calculated and experimentally measured purity, recovery and productivity was 3%, 5% and 9%, respectively. This study provides the necessary confidence to use surrogate-based process models for adsorbent screening and adsorption process optimization.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.233 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicIndustrial Gas Emission ControlFrench-language works237,207