MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A comprehensive Study for Predicting the Geometrical Characteristics of an Inclined Negatively Buoyant Jet Using Group Method of Data Handling (GMDH) Neural Network

2023· preprint· en· W4389752639 on OpenAlexaff
Hassan Alfaifi, Hossein Bonakdari

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersKing Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology
KeywordsDimensionless quantityArtificial neural networkGroup method of data handlingNozzleData pointExperimental dataMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMachine learningMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for predicting the geometrical characteristics of the mixing behavior of an inclined dense jet for angles ranging from 15° to 85° is proposed in this study. This approach is called group method of data handling (GMDH) which is based on the artificial neural network (ANN) technique. The proposed model was trained and tested using existing experimental data reported in literature. The model was then evaluated using statistical indices as well as compared with analytical models from previous studies. The results of the coefficient of determination (R2) indicate a high accuracy of the proposed model with values of 0.9719 and 0.9513 for training and testing for the dimensionless of the distance from the nozzle to the return point xr/D, and 0.9454 and 0.9565 for training and testing for the dimensionless of the terminal rise height yt/D . Moreover, four previous analytical models were used to evaluate the GMDH model. The results showed the superiority of the proposed model in predicting the geometrical characteristics of the inclined dense jet for all tested angles. Finally, the standard error of estimate (SEE) was applied to demonstrate which model performed the best in terms of getting closer to the actual data. The results illustrate that all fitting lines of the GMDH model performed very well for all geometrical parameter predictions and was the best model with approximately 10% error, which was the lowest value of error among the models. Therefore, this study confirms that the GMDH model can be used to predict the geometrical properties of the inclined negatively buoyant jet with high performance and accuracy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.102 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicNuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFrench-language works237,207