Prediction of Final Phosphorus Content of Steel in a Scrap-Based Electric Arc Furnace Using Artificial Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The scrap-based electric arc furnace process is expected to capture a significant share of the steel market in the future due to its potential for reducing environmental impacts through steel recycling. However, managing impurities, particularly phosphorus, remains a challenge. This study aims to develop a machine learning model to estimate the steel phosphorus content at the end of the process based on input parameters. Data were collected over two years from a steel plant, focusing on the chemical composition and weight of the scrap, the volume of oxygen injected, and process duration. After preprocessing the data, several machine learning models were evaluated, with the artificial neural network (ANN) emerging as the most effective. The best ANN model included four hidden layers. The model was trained for 500 epochs with a batch size of 50. The best model achieves a mean square error (MSE) of 0.000016, a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 0.0049998, a coefficient of determination (R2) of 99.96%, and a correlation coefficient (r) of 99.98%. Notably, the model achieved a 100% hit rate for predicting phosphorus content within +-0.001 wt% (+-10 ppm). These results demonstrate that the optimized ANN model offers accurate predictions for the steel final phosphorus content.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".