A comparative study on machine learning regression algorithms aplied to modeling gas centrifuge / Um estudo comparativo sobre algoritmos de regressão de aprendizagem de máquinas aplicado à modelagem de centrífugas a gás
The gas Centrifuge is a very hard equipment to model, because it involves a gas dynamic with many complications, such as hypersonic waves and rarefied regions combined with continuous flow areas. Therefore, data analysis regressions remain currently a very important technique to understand and descr...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Instituto Superior de Educação Vera Cruz (VeraCruz) |
| Repositorio: | Revista Veras |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs2.ojs.brazilianjournals.com.br:article/50490 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://ojs.brazilianjournals.com.br/ojs/index.php/BRJD/article/view/50490 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | gas centrifuge Uranium enrichment machine learning multivariate regression xgboost artificial neural network support vector machine spline k- nearest neighbors multivariate adaptive regression splines |
| Sumario: | The gas Centrifuge is a very hard equipment to model, because it involves a gas dynamic with many complications, such as hypersonic waves and rarefied regions combined with continuous flow areas. Therefore, data analysis regressions remain currently a very important technique to understand and describe the problem in a practical way. This paper intends to apply and compare several regression techniques using machine learning, to obtain a hydraulic and a separative power model of gas centrifuge used in enrichment plants. For this purpose, a set of normalized data composed of 134 experimental lines was used, observing the variables of interest, the separation power (dU), and the waste pressure (Pw), through the following explanatory variables: feed flow (F), cut (q), and product pressure (Pp). The comparisons were presented between the results obtained for the models generated by the following: algorithms, multivariate regression, multivariate adaptive regression splines – MARS, bootstrap aggregating multivariate adaptive regression splines – Bagging MARS, artificial neural network – ANN, extreme gradient boosting – XGBoost, support vector regression– Poly SVR, radial basis Function support vector regression – RBF SVR, K-nearest neighbors – KNN and Stacked Ensemble. That way, to avoid overfitting and provide insights about generalization of the models in unseen data, during the training phase, the k-fold cross validation approach was used. Subsequently, the residuals were analyzed, and the models were compared by the following metrics: Root mean square error – RMSE; Mean squared error – MSE; Mean absolute error – MAE; and Coefficient of determination – R2. |
|---|