MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404511110 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25559

Prediction of <scp> SO <sub>2</sub> </scp> concentration in <scp>WFGD</scp> system based on <scp>GWO</scp> optimized <scp>CNN</scp> ‐ <scp>BiLSTM</scp> ‐attention

2024· article· en· W4404511110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Minan Tang, Zhongcheng Bai, Jiandong Qiu, Chuntao Rao, Yuxuan Jiang, Wenxin Sheng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAir Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Gansu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Due to external disturbances, the parameters of the desulphurization system are uncertain, and their relationships are complex, which makes it difficult to predict the concentration of SO 2 at the desulphurization system outlet. In this paper, grey wolf optimization (GWO) optimized convolutional neural network (CNN)‐bi‐directional long short‐term memory (BiLSTM)‐Attention algorithm was used for prediction, and the problem of low SO 2 concentration prediction accuracy at outlet has been resolved. First, the outliers of the thermal power plant desulphurization data were processed using the local outlier factor (LOF) algorithm. Secondly, CNN‐BiLSTM model was constructed using CNN and BiLSTM, and attention module was added to realize feature extraction and better capture the regularity of input data. Then, the CNN‐BiLSTM‐Attention model was optimized using GWO and its hyperparameters were improved. Finally, based on the Matlab R2023a platform, the prediction comparison as well as the error analysis of the desulphurization data were carried out. In the prediction of SO 2 concentration in low‐flow continuous slurry supply mode, the error of the combined model decreased by 23.2% on average compared to the CNN‐BiLSTM‐Attention model. In the prediction of SO 2 concentration in the high‐flow intermittent slurry supply mode, the error of the combined model decreased by 20.8% on average. According to the results, the combined model surpasses both the single model and several other algorithmic combination models in terms of performance metrics, and the predictions are more accurate.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAir Quality Monitoring and ForecastingFrench-language works237,207