Multi‐model predictive control of<scp>SCR</scp>flue gas denitrification system in coal‐fired power plant based on kernel fuzzy c‐means clustering and integrated model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A multi‐model predictive control strategy based on kernel fuzzy c‐means (KFCM) clustering and integrated model is proposed for the complex problem of rapid and accurate control of ammonia injection in selective catalytic reduction (SCR) denitrification systems of coal‐fired power plants under a wide range of variable load conditions. First, the SCR data samples are clustered using the KFCM clustering algorithm, and the number of clusters is determined by introducing the Xie‐Beni index. Second, the prediction model of the SCR denitrification system is established by an integrated modelling approach, and the sub‐learners of the integrated model are the genetic algorithm optimized back propagation (GA‐BP) neural network model and the least squares support vector machine (LSSVM) model. Third, a multi‐model prediction controller based on the particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm and the integrated model is designed and developed. To ensure the stability of the system, a model‐switching strategy based on the minimum Euclidean distance is proposed. Finally, simulation verification and industrial field application verification are fulfilled by comparing with proportion integral differential (PID) control and single model predictive control (MPC). The results show that the multi‐model predictive control method proposed in this paper can obtain higher control accuracy and better control stability and meet the control requirements for the long‐term operation of the SCR denitrification system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".