MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200522034 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24349

Modelling and optimization of the ferrous to ferric sulphate conversion with hydrogen peroxide using <scp>polynomial‐PSO</scp> and <scp>PSO‐ANNs</scp> models

2021· article· en· W4200522034 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Verônica Barbosa Mazza, Rodrigo de Andrade Bustamante, Ana Rosa Fonseca de Aguiar Martins, Luiz Alberto César Teixeira, Brunno Ferreira dos Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationFerricFerrousArtificial neural networkResponse surface methodologyPolynomialPolynomial and rational function modelingHydrogen peroxideFactorial experimentBiological systemProcess (computing)ChlorineComputer scienceProcess engineeringChemistryMathematical optimizationAlgorithmMathematicsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMachine learningOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this present work, polynomial and artificial neural networks models, adjusted by particle swarm optimization, were implemented in an attempt to improve process modelling and to achieve reliable reaction representation behaviour. Parameter optimization of the conversion reaction of ferrous to ferric sulphate in concentrated solutions using hydrogen peroxide as an oxidant is a process of interest due to the importance of producing this ferric salt, a widely used coagulant/flocculant in water treatment, as a chlorine‐free product. Previous work reported a process optimization attempt based on a factorial design of experiments. The obtained polynomial model based on least‐squares showed a minimally satisfactory R 2 of 0.7481. The comparison of the obtained models' performance showed a significant improvement in the prediction of experimental conditions. The results indicated that artificial neural networks‐based models presented a higher predictive capability for highly non‐linear experimental data, and the best model achieved an R 2 of 0.9744 for the conversion prediction. Optimal ranges for cost‐effective process conditions were investigated through the refined response surface charts obtained.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207