MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414862245 · doi:10.3390/pr13103174

Kolmogorov–Arnold Network for Predicting CO2 Corrosion and Performance Comparison with Traditional Data-Driven Approaches

2025· article· en· W4414862245 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenzhen Dong, Lu Zou, Yiming Xu, Chenhong Guo, Fenggang Wen, Wei Wang, Ji Qi, Min Zhang, Guoqing Dong, Weirong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionPipeline (software)HyperparameterHyperparameter optimizationLimitingArtificial neural networkMultilayer perceptronPipeline transport

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate prediction of CO2 corrosion under dense-phase and supercritical conditions remains a critical challenge for oil and gas pipeline integrity management. While machine learning (ML) has been applied in this field, prevailing models like the Multilayer Perceptron (MLP) often struggle to capture the complex, non-linear interactions between multiple environmental parameters, limiting their predictive accuracy and robustness. To bridge this gap, this study innovatively introduces the Kolmogorov–Arnold Network (KAN) algorithm for CO2 corrosion rate prediction. Utilizing a unique dataset of field-collected parameters (including dissolved O2, H2S, SO2 concentrations, and water cut), we developed a KAN model and conducted systematic hyperparameter optimization. Our investigation revealed the optimal network configuration (3 layers, grid = 3) and, counterintuitively, that the steps parameter does not correlate positively with performance. Most significantly, comparative experiments demonstrated that the KAN model substantially outperforms traditional MLP, achieving superior prediction accuracy alongside faster computational speed and lower loss values. These findings not only provide a robust tool for precise corrosion prevention in oilfield operations but also highlight the potential of KAN as a novel, efficient, and highly accurate framework for tackling complex problems in materials degradation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcessesSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207