Modified particle swarm optimisation to determine the kinetic parameters of 2-chlorophenol oxidation in supercritical water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An analytical chemical kinetics model can investigate the impact of concentrations, pressures, temperatures, and catalysts on the rates of reactions. It serves as the foundation for process design, effectiveness, and control. Nevertheless, the chemical kinetics model presents numerous dynamic characteristics that pose challenges in terms of prediction based on experimental empirical evidence. The present work employed three particle swarm optimisation (PSO) algorithms in order to determine the optimal parameters of the kinetic model. We wanted to reduce root mean squared errors. The operators’ efficacy is shown by numerical tests on benchmark functions and comparison to the fundamental GWO and ABC operators. The computational findings demonstrate that m-PSO shows a least RMSE value of 0.043 in comparison to other models and also significantly enhances both accuracy and convergence rate compared to other described methods. The model's improved search capabilities are shown by the kinetic parameter estimate findings utilising supercritical water oxidation experimental data.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".