Efficient Design of the Hydrogen Liquefaction System: Thermodynamic, Economic, Environmental, and Uncertainty Perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrogen (H 2 ) liquefaction is one of the most promising approaches for storing and transporting clean energy on a large scale for long periods. However, this strategy faces the challenges of high energy consumption, relatively low exergy efficiency, substantial economic costs, boil-off gas losses, and limited knowledge of its environmental perspectives. A robust systematic framework is introduced by integrating thermodynamic, machine learning (ML), and multiobjective optimization (MOO) approaches to optimize the operational variables of the H 2 liquefaction process. The H 2 liquefaction process includes a mixed refrigerant precooling unit and a Joule-Brayton cryogenic cascade cycle. The combination of the pinch analysis approach and enumerative algorithms is used in the initial optimization phase as a nonlinear method to determine the operational variables of the precooling and liquefaction systems. The exergy efficiency and exergy destruction of H 2 liquefaction cycles are calculated as 49% and 5073 kW to produce 50 tons/day of liquid H 2 . Based on life cycle assessment and economic analysis, the global warming and levelized cost to produce 1 kg liquid H 2 are calculated at 124 kgCO 2 eq and 4.833 US$, respectively. The sensitivity analysis, ML, and MOO algorithms (particle swarm, genetic algorithm, and gray wolf techniques) in the final optimization phase are used to determine the Pareto frontier. The multicriteria decision techniques are used to identify the optimal operating conditions considering the thermodynamic, economic, and environmental aspects. The uncertainty levels of objective functions based on different parameters are studied by uncertainty quantification using Monte Carlo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".