MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407070119 · doi:10.1016/j.aej.2025.01.126

Prediction of viscosity of blast furnace slag based on NRBO-DNN model

2025· article· en· W4407070119 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlexandria Engineering Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIron and Steelmaking Processes
Canadian institutionsIron Ore Company (Canada)
FundersHebei United University
KeywordsBlast furnaceSlag (welding)Ground granulated blast-furnace slagViscosityMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceMetallurgyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The viscosity of blast furnace slag significantly impacts operations, slag discharge, and heat recovery. However, accurately measuring or calculating viscosity is challenging due to the complex composition, interactions among variables, and experimental difficulties at high temperatures. To address this issue, a prediction model was developed based on slag composition. Data preprocessing included isolation forest outlier detection, missing data imputation, normalization, and Generative Adversarial Network (GAN)-based data augmentation, ensuring high-quality data. Among traditional neural network models, the Deep Neural Network (DNN) demonstrated the best accuracy. Optimizing the DNN with an intelligent swarm algorithm resulted in the NRBO-DNN model, which achieved MAE, MSE, RMSE, and R² values of 0.04050, 0.00305, 0.05527, and 0.97599, respectively. Compared to the unoptimized DNN, MAE, MSE, and RMSE decreased by 53.86 %, 50.30 %, and 29.50 %, while R² improved by 8.11 %. Tests on 100 datasets confirmed the NRBO-DNN’s superior accuracy, with an average error of 4.30 %. This study provides theoretical support and practical guidance for optimizing blast furnace operations.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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