4.7 Article

Proximate analysis based prediction of gross calorific value of coals: A comparison of support vector machine, alternating conditional expectation and artificial neural network

期刊

FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 129, 期 -, 页码 120-129

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.09.001

关键词

Gross calorific value; Alternating conditional expectation; Artificial neural network; Support vector machine; Proximate analysis

资金

  1. PCSIRT [IRT1294]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [14CX02046A, 14CX06027A]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11302265]
  4. National Science and Technology Major Project of China [2011ZX05038]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gross calorific value (GCV) of coal is important in both the direct use and conversion into other fuel forms of coals. The measurement of GCV usually requires sophisticated bomb calorimetric experimental apparatus and expertise, whereas proximate analysis is much cheaper, easier and faster to conduct. This paper presents the application of three regression models, i.e., support vector machine (SVM), alternating conditional expectation (ACE) and back propagation neural network (BPNN) to predict the GCV of coals based on proximate analysis information. Analytical data of 76 Chinese coal samples, with a large variation in rank were acquired and used as input into these models. The modeling results show that: 1) all three methods are generally capable of tracking the variation trend of GCV with the proximate analysis parameters; 2) SVM performs the best in terms of generalization capability among the models investigated; 3) BPNN has the potential to outperform SVM in the training stage and ACE in both training and testing stages; however, its prediction accuracy is dramatically affected by the model parameters including hidden neuron number, learning rate and initial weights; 4) ACE performs slightly better with respect to the generalization capability than does BPNN, on an averaged scale. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据