4.6 Article

Prediction of the critical temperature of a superconductor by using the WOA/MARS, Ridge, Lasso and Elastic-net machine learning techniques

Journal

NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS
Volume 33, Issue 24, Pages 17131-17145

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-021-06304-z

Keywords

Critical temperature; Superconductivity; Multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS); Whale optimization algorithm (WOA)

Funding

  1. European Funds (FEDER) [PGC2018-098459-B-I00, FC-GRUPIN-IDI/2018/000221]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed a predictive model based on a hybrid WOA/MARS approach to successfully estimate the critical temperature of a superconductor. Results showed that the WOA/MARS model outperformed the Ridge, Lasso, and Elastic-net regression models in predicting the critical temperature.
This study builds a predictive model capable of estimating the critical temperature of a superconductor from experimentally determined physico-chemical properties of the material (input variables): features extracted from the thermal conductivity, atomic radius, valence, electron affinity and atomic mass. This original model is built using a novel hybrid algorithm relied on the multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) technique in combination with a nature-inspired meta-heuristic optimization algorithm termed the whale optimization algorithm (WOA) that mimics the social behavior of humpback whales. Additionally, the Ridge, Lasso and Elastic-net regression models were fitted to the same experimental data for comparison purposes. The results of the current investigation indicate that the critical temperature of a superconductor can be successfully predicted using this proposed hybrid WOA/MARS-based model. Furthermore, the results obtained with the Ridge, Lasso and Elastic-net regression models are clearly worse than those obtained with the WOA/MARS-based model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available