Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33082441›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Functional input and membership characteristics in the accuracy of machine learning approach for estimation of multiphase flow.

Meisam Babanezhad, Ali Taghvaie Nakhjiri, Mashallah Rezakazemi, Azam Marjani, Saeed Shirazian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Meisam BabanezhadInstitute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang, 550000, Vietnam.
Ali Taghvaie NakhjiriDepartment of Petroleum and Chemical Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Mashallah RezakazemiFaculty of Chemical and Materials Engineering, Shahrood University of Technology, Shahrood, Iran.
Azam MarjaniDepartment for Management of Science and Technology Development, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. azam.marjani@tdtu.edu.vn.
Saeed ShirazianDepartment of Chemical Sciences, Bernal Institute, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the current study, Artificial Intelligence (AI) approach was used for the learning of a physical system. We applied four inputs and one output in the learning process of AI. In the learning process, the inputs are space locations of a BCR (bubble column reactor), which are x, y, and z coordinate as well as the amount of gas fraction in BCR. The liquid velocity is also considered as output. A variety of functions were used in learning, such as gbellmf and gaussmf functions, to examine which functions can give the best learning. At the end of the study, all of the results were compared to CFD (computational fluid dynamics). A three-dimensional (3D) BCR was used in this research, and we studied simulation by CFD as well as AI. The data from CFD in a 3D BCR was studied in the AI domain. In AI, we tuned for various parameters to achieve the best intelligence in the system. For instance, different inputs, different membership functions, different numbers of membership functions were used in the learning process. Moreover, the meshless prediction was used, meaning that some data in the BCR have not participated in the learning, and they were predicted in the prediction process, which gives us a special capability to compare the results with the CFD outcomes. The findings showed us that AI can predict the CFD results, and a great agreement was achieved between CFD computing nodes and AI elements. This novel methodology can suggest a meshless and multifunctional AI model to simulate the turbulence flow in the BCR. For further evaluation, the ANFIS method is compared with ACOFIS and PSOFIS methods with regards to model's accuracy. The results show that ANFIS method contains higher accuracy and prediction capability compared with ACOFIS and PSOFIS methods.

Identifiers

PMID33082441
PMCPMC7575550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.