MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402252582 · doi:10.1007/s44189-024-00059-7

Adaptive neural network control of a centrifugal chiller system

2024· article· en· W4402252582 on OpenAlexafffund
Songchun Li, Mohammed Zaheeruddin

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkChiller boiler systemChillerControl (management)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsMechanical engineeringWater chillerThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, a neuro-adaptive PI control strategy for a water-cooled centrifugal chiller system is developed, and its control performance is examined. The system model consists of a flooded evaporator, a flooded condenser, a centrifugal compressor, and an electronic expansion valve. The overall system consists of three control loops: a compressor speed control loop, an inlet guide vane (IGV) control loop, and a condenser liquid level control loop. A neuro-adaptive control strategy for compressor speed control was designed. The control performance of the chiller was tested by carrying out simulation runs using an integrated building and HVAC (IB-HVAC) system model. The major details of the IB-HVAC model are described in this paper. Results show that the neuro-adaptive controller can adapt to new system dynamics of the IB-HVAC system and give good setpoint tracking responses under a wide range of operating conditions. The results show that the neuro-adaptive controller performs better than the constant gain PI controller in terms of speed of response and setpoint tracking properties.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Air-Conditioning and RefrigerationSame topicGreenhouse Technology and Climate ControlFrench-language works237,207