Computationally effective machine learning approach for modular thermal energy storage design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research presents an innovative approach that integrates computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and machine learning (ML) for the design and optimization of thermal energy storage (TES) systems. Heat discharging parametric analyses conducted using CFD serve as the basis for training ML models, including linear regression, K-nearest neighbor (KNN) regression, gradient boost regression (GBR), XGBoost, LightGBM , and neural network (NN). NN emerges as the most suitable for predicting time-dependent variations of concrete and heat transfer fluid (HTF) temperatures. The trained ML models offer an efficient alternative to traditional CFD simulations, enabling the prediction of temperatures in concrete thermal energy storage (CTES) modules under varying inlet conditions, velocities, and time. Leveraging these ML models, the research demonstrates the design of modular CTES cascaded systems with multiple modules in series and parallel configurations, significantly reducing computational cost and time by over 99% compared to full-scale CFD simulations. For instance, in predicting 4-hour time-dependent thermal behavior, CFD takes 97 s per data point and 238,500 s for a single module, compared to ML models’ 16-20 ms per data point and around 290 s per module, indicating their efficiency and scalability in predicting thermal discharge, especially for modular CTES system design and optimization. ML models also demonstrate computational efficiency for designing CTES systems involving multiple modules, taking approximately 765 s - 1047 s for various CTES system configurations, indicating their effectiveness over CFD in predicting thermal discharge for modular CTES systems. The integration of CFD and ML provides a streamlined workflow for designing and optimizing CTES systems, reducing computational efforts, cost, and time. Moreover, this workflow can be updated with additional training data to implement it for unique modular designs with different conditions. Such a generalization of this ML-based approach makes it applicable to a wide range of thermal energy storage designs and geometries, offering a promising avenue for future research and development in the field of thermal energy storage.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".