Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34451065›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

LSTM and GRU Neural Networks as Models of Dynamical Processes Used in Predictive Control: A Comparison of Models Developed for Two Chemical Reactors.

Krzysztof Zarzycki, Maciej Ławryńczuk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Model predictive control of anaerobic digestion processes using a long short-term memory network predictor.Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Sensor Data Prediction in Missile Flight Tests.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors.

Krzysztof ZarzyckiFaculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Institute of Control and Computation Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-8436-7325
Maciej ŁawryńczukFaculty of Electronics and Information Technology, Institute of Control and Computation Engineering, Warsaw University of Technology, Nowowiejska 15/19, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6846-2004

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work thoroughly compares the efficiency of Long Short-Term Memory Networks (LSTMs) and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) neural networks as models of the dynamical processes used in Model Predictive Control (MPC). Two simulated industrial processes were considered: a polymerisation reactor and a neutralisation (pH) process. First, MPC prediction equations for both types of models were derived. Next, the efficiency of the LSTM and GRU models was compared for a number of model configurations. The influence of the order of dynamics and the number of neurons on the model accuracy was analysed. Finally, the efficiency of the considered models when used in MPC was assessed. The influence of the model structure on different control quality indicators and the calculation time was discussed. It was found that the GRU network, although it had a lower number of parameters than the LSTM one, may be successfully used in MPC without any significant deterioration of control quality.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, Computerdynamical systemsLSTM and GRU neural networksmodel predictive control

Identifiers

PMID34451065
PMCPMC8402357

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.