2013
DOI: 10.1007/s12155-013-9393-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of Higher Heating Value of Solid Biomass Fuels Using Artificial Intelligence Formalisms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
38
1
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 89 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
38
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This is also true for the models created on data from the open literature, as the resulting database is aggregated from these "homogenous" samples. The proportion of the variability of gross calorific value explained by the present model is lower compared to models by Ghugare et al (2014) or Akkaya (2016); however, this was partially caused by the nature of the empirical material used during the research, which was mixed wood chips commonly used in the industrial energy generation. Our goal was to create a model that represented real conditions in the energy industry.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 58%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This is also true for the models created on data from the open literature, as the resulting database is aggregated from these "homogenous" samples. The proportion of the variability of gross calorific value explained by the present model is lower compared to models by Ghugare et al (2014) or Akkaya (2016); however, this was partially caused by the nature of the empirical material used during the research, which was mixed wood chips commonly used in the industrial energy generation. Our goal was to create a model that represented real conditions in the energy industry.…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 58%
“…However, using multiple variables does not automatically mean a greater determination of the variability; Phichai et al (2013) used volatile matter content and free carbon content in their model and were only able to explain about 41% of the variability, Jiménez and Gonzáles (1991) were able to determine about 53% of the variability of gross calorific value through volatile matter and free carbon content. On the other hand, Ghugare et al (2014) developed a model with more than 96% determination using genetic programing on proximate analysis data, and Akkaya (2016) achieved 88% determination of gross calorific value through proximate analysis data with an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system model. Most models are built around material collected from one locality, harvested by one technology, from one tree species, etc.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is defined as the energy released per unit mass or per unit volume of fuel after complete combustion, including the energy contained in the water vapor in the exhaust gases [45]. The HHV indicates the best use for biomass fuel, as it describes the energy content [36].…”
Section: Higher Heating Valuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among these, the tree-structured GP forms the most commonly employed GP-implementation. Earlier, in a related study on biomass fuels, GP was employed for the development of nonlinear correlations possessing high prediction accuracies and generalization abilities for the prediction of higher heating values (HHVs) of biomass fuels from the constituents of proximate and ultimate analyses (Ghugare et al 2014). Other recent applications of GP in chemical engineering range from soft-sensor development for biochemical systems to prediction of the synthesis of heat-integrated complex distillation systems (Wang et al 2008).…”
Section: Genetic Programming (Gp)mentioning
confidence: 99%