In the process industry, sustaining and maintaining process performance is an important component of advanced process control of an industrial or chemical plant. Sustained and maintained process performance may provide an extended period of efficient and safe operation and reduced maintenance costs at the plant. Prior solutions for advanced process control include linear dynamic models. For certain chemical process units, a linear dynamic model is not adequate to fully capture the process behavior, and the resulting controller cannot optimize the process to its fullest potential.
In a process for which a more sophisticated model is needed, Deep Learning is a candidate for modeling the process. Deep Learning has the capability to capture very nonlinear behavior. However, building a Deep Learning model requires a significant amount of process data with rich content, which is normally not readily available from regular plant operation data.
Embodiments disclosed herein are directed to solving this issue. One example embodiment is a method for creating a Deep Learning based model predictive controller for an industrial process. The example method includes creating a linear dynamic model of the industrial process, and based on the linear dynamic model, creating a linear model predictive controller to control and perturb the industrial process. The linear model predictive controller is employed in the industrial process and data is collected during execution of the industrial process. The example method further includes training a Deep Learning model of the industrial process based on the data collected using the linear model predictive controller, and based on the Deep Learning model, creating a Deep Learning model predictive controller to control the industrial process.
Another example embodiment is a system for controlling an industrial process. The example system includes a linear dynamic model of the industrial process, a linear model predictive controller, a Deep Learning model of the industrial process, and a Deep Learning model predictive controller. The linear model predictive controller is configured to control and perturb the industrial process. It is created based on the linear dynamic model and is configured to be employed in the industrial process to collect data during execution of the industrial process. The Deep Learning model of the industrial process is trained based on the data collected using the linear model predictive controller. The Deep Learning model predictive controller is created based on the Deep Learning model, and is configured to control the industrial process.
Another example embodiment is a non-transitory computer-readable data storage medium comprising instructions to cause a computer to create a linear dynamic model of an industrial process, and based on the linear dynamic model, create a linear model predictive controller to control and perturb the industrial process. The instructions further cause the computer to employ the linear model predictive controller in the industrial process and collect data during execution of the industrial process. The instructions further cause the computer to train a Deep Learning model of the industrial process based on the data collected using the linear model predictive controller, and based on the Deep Learning model, create a Deep Learning model predictive controller to control the industrial process.
In some embodiments, the linear dynamic model may be a linear regression model. The linear model predictive controller can perform non-invasive closed-loop exploration to collect the data. The Deep Learning model can be a recurrent neural network. A piecewise linear dynamic model can be created based on the Deep Learning model and the Deep Learning model predictive controller can be optimized based on the piecewise linear dynamic model. Optimizing the Deep Learning model predictive controller can include smoothing derivatives of the Deep Learning model. Non-invasive closed-loop exploration can be used to further optimize the Deep Learning model predictive controller.
The foregoing will be apparent from the following more particular description of example embodiments, as illustrated in the accompanying drawings in which like reference characters refer to the same parts throughout the different views. The drawings are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating embodiments.
A description of example embodiments follows.
New systems and methods are disclosed for building and updating a Deep Learning based advanced process controller. A simplified linear dynamic model (approximate model) can be built from readily available regular plant operation data, without dedicated plant perturbation. The approximate model then can be used to create a controller to carry out perturbation while keeping the plant in closed-loop control with relaxed economic optimization. As new informative data becomes available, a more sophisticated model, such as Deep Learning model, can be created, which can more accurately describe the plant behavior, such as severe nonlinearity. Based on the Deep Learning model, a more sophisticated controller can be built, which can optimize the plant to its fullest potential. If needed, the Deep Learning based controller can continue the closed-loop perturbation with relaxed economic optimization, so that more data can be collected and the controller can be improved further.
This new paradigm overcomes problems associated with a more sophisticated controller, such as Deep Learning based controller, such as the need to optimize a severe nonlinear process when readily-available data can only yield a simplified approximate model. Further, the new solution can reduce the interruption to the plant operation compared to a conventional open-loop plant step testing approach, so that the new solution can be used on a regular basis to update the controller in response to plant condition changes.
Example Network Environment for Plant Processes
The system computers 101 and 102 may communicate with the data server 103 to access collected data for measurable process variables from a historian database 111. The data server 103 may be further communicatively coupled to a distributed control system (DCS) 104, or any other plant control system, which may be configured with instruments 109A-109I, 106, 107 that collect data at a regular sampling period (e.g., one sample per minute) for the measurable process variables, 106, 107 are online analyzers (e.g., gas chromatographs) that collect data at a longer sampling period. The instruments may communicate the collected data to an instrumentation computer 105, also configured in the DCS 104, and the instrumentation computer 105 may in turn communicate the collected data to the data server 103 over communications network 108. The data server 103 may then archive the collected data in the historian database 111 for model calibration and inferential model training purposes. The data collected varies according to the type of target process.
The collected data may include measurements for various measurable process variables. These measurements may include, for example, a feed stream flow rate as measured by a flow meter 109B, a feed stream temperature as measured by a temperature sensor 109C, component feed concentrations as determined by an analyzer 109A, and reflux stream temperature in a pipe as measured by a temperature sensor 109D. The collected data may also include measurements for process output stream variables, such as, for example, the concentration of produced materials, as measured by analyzers 106 and 107. The collected data may further include measurements for manipulated input variables, such as, for example, reflux flow rate as set by valve 109F and determined by flow meter 109H, a re-boiler steam flow rate as set by valve 109E and measured by flow meter 109I, and pressure in a column as controlled by a valve 109G. The collected data reflect the operation conditions of the representative plant during a particular sampling period. The collected data is archived in the historian database 111 for model calibration and inferential model training purposes. The data collected varies according to the type of target process.
The system computers 101 or 102 may execute various types of process controllers for online deployment purposes. The output values generated by the controller(s) on the system computers 101 or 102 may be provided to the instrumentation computer 105 over the network 108 for an operator to view, or may be provided to automatically program any other component of the DCS 104, or any other plant control system or processing system coupled to the DCS system 104. Alternatively, the instrumentation computer 105 can store the historical data 111 through the data server 103 in the historian database 111 and execute the process controller(s) in a stand-alone mode. Collectively, the instrumentation computer 105, the data server 103, and various sensors and output drivers (e.g., 109A-109I, 106, 107) form the DCS 104 and can work together to implement and run the presented application.
The example architecture 100 of the computer system supports the process operation of in a representative plant. In this embodiment, the representative plant may be, for example, a refinery or a chemical processing plant having a number of measurable process variables, such as, for example, temperature, pressure, and flow rate variables. It should be understood that in other embodiments a wide variety of other types of technological processes or equipment in the useful arts may be used.
A generic dynamic process can be described as:
Y(k)=F(U(k), . . . ,U(k−N)) (1)
Where, F is a linear or nonlinear function, k is the time, N is the dynamic memory length, U and Y are input variables and output variables, respectively.
U=[u1,u2, . . . ,um],m≥1
Y=[y1,y2, . . . ,yn],n≥1
The process operation constraints can be described as:
UL≤U≤UH (2)
YL≤Y≤YH (3)
Where, UL and UH are input variable low and high limits, and YL and YH are output variable low and high limits, respectively.
For a linear dynamic process, equation (1) can be re-written as
For a nonlinear dynamic process, a possible representation can be a Deep Learning model as illustrated in
The goal of an advanced process controller is to find a sequence of process inputs so that the process outputs satisfy the process constraints while a pre-defined objective function J is optimized:
s.t. (1), (2), and (3)
Step 1: Create an approximate model.
Using available plant operation data and data cleaning technology, select the data segments that contain movements in the input variables. Use the selected data to identify a linear dynamic model (approximate model) as shown in (4).
Step 2: Build a linear controller to run closed-loop exploration (step testing).
Based on the created approximate model, construct a linear model predictive controller. Deploy the controller online. Choose a control/test tradeoff ratio to run the controller. Adjust the ratio to balance optimization and perturbation, as well as control robustness. See U.S. Pat. No. 9,513,610 for details regarding control/test tradeoff ratios, incorporated herein by reference.
Step 3: Train a Deep Learning model.
Train a Deep Learning model using the collected exploration data. To capture dynamics, a certain type of Recurrent Neural Network can be chosen, such as Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM). For control purposes, the Deep Learning model should have certain properties, such as no oscillation in derivatives. This can be accomplished through adjusting the hyperparameters as in, for example, TensorFlow package, or smoothing the Deep Learning derivatives before being supplied to the control calculation, as described below.
Step 4: Build a Deep Learning controller.
Model predictive control involves two major calculations: a steady-state target determination, and a dynamic move plan calculation. To use a Deep Learning model, some new algorithms can be used:
1) Choose a maximal allowed step fraction, a, for the input and output variables, where 0<α≤1.
2) Calculate the local derivatives from the Deep Learning model:
from the Deep Learning model.
3) Run optimization problem (5) with the locally linearized model:
with the following additional constraints
|U−Ucurrent|≤(UH−UL)*a
|Y−Yss|≤(YH−YL)*a (7)
Denote the solution as [Ua, Ya].
4) Using [Ua, Ya] as the reference point, update the local derivatives from the Deep Learning model, and then re-run 3). If the new solution appears to be oscillating around the previous solution, stop the iteration; otherwise continue the iteration.
5) Create a piecewise linear dynamic model:
6) Calculate a Dynamic Move Plan:
7) Smooth the local derivatives:
Step 5: Adaptation of Deep Learning controller
After the Deep Learning controller deployed online, it can be further improved using a similar approach as described in U.S. Pat. No. 9,513,610, with the following modification: When calculating a step move size, use (6) and (7) instead of the Deep Learning model.
The following is an example to illustrate the concepts presented above.
A select portion from the plant operation data can be used to create a simplified linear regression model, such as the step response model shown in
With the linear dynamic model, a linear model predictive controller can be constructed and, using the technology detailed in U.S. Pat. No. 9,513,610, for example, this controller can be used to control and perturb the plant simultaneously. It can generate more data with rich content for modeling purpose, as illustrated in
Using the new data, a more sophisticated model such as a Deep Learning model can be created and then used to construct a Deep Learning based model predictive controller.
Example Digital Processing Environment
In one embodiment, the processor routines 92 and data 94 are a computer program product (generally referenced 92), including a computer readable medium (e.g., a removable storage medium such as one or more DVD-ROM's, CD-ROM's, diskettes, tapes) that provides at least a portion of the software instructions for the disclosed system. Computer program product 92 can be installed by any suitable software installation procedure, as is well known in the art. In another embodiment, at least a portion of the software instructions may also be downloaded over a cable, communication, and/or wireless connection. In other embodiments, the programs are a computer program propagated signal product 74 (
In alternate embodiments, the propagated signal is an analog carrier wave or digital signal carried on the propagated medium. For example, the propagated signal may be a digitized signal propagated over a global network (e.g., the Internet), a telecommunications network, or other network. In one embodiment, the propagated signal is a signal that is transmitted over the propagation medium over a period of time, such as the instructions for a software application sent in packets over a network over a period of milliseconds, seconds, minutes, or longer. In another embodiment, the computer readable medium of computer program product 92 is a propagation medium that the computer system 50 may receive and read, such as by receiving the propagation medium and identifying a propagated signal embodied in the propagation medium, as described above for computer program propagated signal product. Generally speaking, the term “carrier medium” or transient carrier encompasses the foregoing transient signals, propagated signals, propagated medium, storage medium and the like. In other embodiments, the program product 92 may be implemented as a so-called Software as a Service (SaaS), or other installation or communication supporting end-users.
It should be understood that the flow diagrams, block diagrams, and network diagrams may include more or fewer elements, be arranged differently, or be represented differently. But further it should be understood that certain implementations may dictate the block and network diagrams and the number of block and network diagrams illustrating the execution of the embodiments be implemented in a particular way. Accordingly, further embodiments may also be implemented in a variety of computer architectures, physical, virtual, cloud computers, and/or some combination thereof, and, thus, the data processors described herein are intended for purposes of illustration only and not as limitations of the embodiments.
While example embodiments have been particularly shown and described, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details may be made therein without departing from the scope of the embodiments encompassed by the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5301101 | MacArthur | Apr 1994 | A |
5410634 | Li | Apr 1995 | A |
5640491 | Bhat | Jun 1997 | A |
5682309 | Bartusiak et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
6056781 | Wassick et al. | May 2000 | A |
6088630 | Cawlfield | Jul 2000 | A |
6819964 | Harmse | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6937966 | Hellerstein et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7050863 | Mehta et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7085615 | Persson et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7194317 | Kothare et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7209793 | Harmse et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7213007 | Grichnik | May 2007 | B2 |
7257501 | Zhan et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7330804 | Turner et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7421374 | Zhan et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
8295952 | Macarthur et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8296070 | Paxson et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8560092 | Zheng et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8755940 | Lou et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8762301 | Buckbee, Jr. | Jun 2014 | B1 |
9046882 | Bartee et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9141911 | Zhao et al. | Sep 2015 | B2 |
9367804 | Moon et al. | Jun 2016 | B1 |
9513610 | Zheng et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9535808 | Bates et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9727035 | Keenan et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
10031510 | Zhao et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10114367 | Bates et al. | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10739752 | Zhao et al. | Aug 2020 | B2 |
10990067 | Modi | Apr 2021 | B2 |
11630446 | Andreu et al. | Apr 2023 | B2 |
20010051862 | Ishibashi et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020099724 | Harmse | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20030220828 | Hwang et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040049295 | Wojsznis et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040249481 | Zheng et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010369 | Varpela et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050149208 | Harmse et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050240382 | Nakaya et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20060079983 | Willis | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060111858 | Zhu | May 2006 | A1 |
20060136138 | Hicklin et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20070225835 | Zhu | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20080183311 | MacArthur et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080188957 | Cutler | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090005889 | Sayyar-Rodsari | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090210081 | Sustaeta et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090222108 | Lou et al. | Sep 2009 | A1 |
20100049369 | Lou et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100241247 | Attarwala | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110066299 | Gray et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110130850 | Zheng et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20120003623 | Bartee et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120004893 | Vaidyanathan et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120084400 | Almadi et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120173004 | Radl | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20130151179 | Gray | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130151212 | Gray et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130204403 | Zheng et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20130246316 | Zhao et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
20130338842 | Inoue et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140114598 | Almadi et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20140115121 | Almadi et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20150316905 | Zheng et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20160018796 | Lu | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160018797 | Lu | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160048119 | Wojsznis et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160260041 | Horn et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160320768 | Zhao et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170308802 | Ramsøy et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20180019910 | Tsagkaris et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180060738 | Achin et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180157225 | Dave et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180299862 | Zhao et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180299875 | Mariswamy et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180341252 | Lu | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20180348717 | Zhao et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20180356806 | Dave et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190095816 | Lee et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190101902 | Sayyarrodsari et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190102352 | Sayyarrodsari et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190102360 | Sayyarrodsari et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190102657 | Sayyarrodsari et al. | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20190179271 | Modi et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190188584 | Rao et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190197403 | Schmidhuber | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190236447 | Cohen et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20200103838 | Bertinetti et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200133210 | Zheng | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200257969 | Goloubew | Aug 2020 | A1 |
20200258157 | Law | Aug 2020 | A1 |
20200379442 | Chan | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20200387818 | Chan | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210116891 | Zhao | Apr 2021 | A1 |
20220260980 | Andreu et al. | Aug 2022 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
107430398 | Dec 2017 | CN |
2825920 | Jan 2021 | EP |
2409293 | Jun 2005 | GB |
06-028009 | Feb 1994 | JP |
06-083427 | Mar 1994 | JP |
06-187004 | Jul 1994 | JP |
09-212207 | Aug 1997 | JP |
2002-526852 | Aug 2002 | JP |
2002-329187 | Nov 2002 | JP |
2004-265381 | Sep 2004 | JP |
2005-202934 | Jul 2005 | JP |
2009-509217 | Mar 2009 | JP |
2009-516301 | Apr 2009 | JP |
2011-054163 | Mar 2011 | JP |
2013-535730 | Sep 2013 | JP |
2019-021186 | Feb 2019 | JP |
2019-521444 | Jul 2019 | JP |
0020939 | Apr 2000 | WO |
2002005042 | Jan 2002 | WO |
2008119008 | Oct 2008 | WO |
2012012723 | Jan 2012 | WO |
2012118067 | Sep 2012 | WO |
2013119665 | Aug 2013 | WO |
2013170041 | Nov 2013 | WO |
2015149928 | Oct 2015 | WO |
2016093960 | Jun 2016 | WO |
2018009546 | Jan 2018 | WO |
2018075995 | Apr 2018 | WO |
2018223000 | Dec 2018 | WO |
2019086760 | May 2019 | WO |
2020091942 | May 2020 | WO |
2020227383 | Nov 2020 | WO |
2020247204 | Dec 2020 | WO |
2021025841 | Feb 2021 | WO |
2021076760 | Apr 2021 | WO |
Entry |
---|
https://www.google.com/search?q=deep+learning&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS1008&oq=deep+learinig&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0i10i433j0i10j0i10i131i433j46i10j0i10l3j0i10i433j0i10.5742j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/042239, dated Feb. 17, 2022, 8 pages. |
Zhao, et al., “An Identification Approach to Nonlinear State Space Model for Industrial Multivariable Model Predictive Control”, Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Jun. 1998. |
Qin, et al., “A Survey of Industrial Model Predictive Control Technology”, Control Engineering Practice 11 (2003). |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application No. PCT/US2013/024932, “Apparatus And Methods For Non-Invasive Closed Loop Step Testing Using A Tunable Trade-Off Factor,” dated Aug. 12, 2014. |
International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/024932, dated May 2, 2013, 9 pages. |
Soliman, M., “Multiple Model Predictive Control for Wind Turbines with Doubly Fed Induction Generators,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 215-225 (2011). |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2019/054465 dated May 14, 2021 titled “Apparatus and Methods for Non-Invasive Closed Loop Step Testing with Controllable Optimization Relaxation”. |
Mohamed, et al., “A Neural-Network-Based Model Predictive Control of Three-Phase Inverter with an Output LC Filter,” Cornell University Library, ArXiv:1902.099643v3, XP081457097, whole document, Feb. 22, 2019. |
“Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and The Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, or the Declaration,” for International Application No. PCT/US2020/042239, entitled “Apparatus And Methods To Build Deep Learning Controller Using Non-Invasive Closed Loop Exploration,” dated Oct. 14, 2020. |
S. Joe Qin & Thomas A Badgwell, “A survey of industrial model predictive control technology,” Control Engineering Practice, 11:733-764 (2003). |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/055787, dated Apr. 28, 2022, 7 pages. |
Bhutani, N., et al, “First-Principles, Data-Based, and Hybrid Modeling and Optimization of an Industrial Hydrocracking Unit”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 45 (23), pp. 7807-7816 (2006). |
Brill, et al., “Transportation of liquids in multiphase pipelines under low liquid loading conditions.” Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Tulsa (1995). |
Caetano, “Upward vertical two-phase flow through an annulus,” Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Tulsa (1985). |
European Search Report Application No. 17 751 159.9, entitled Computer System And Method For The Dynamic Construction And Online Deployment Of An Operation-Centric First-Principles Process Model For Predictive Analytics, dated Jan. 21, 2020. |
Fair, J.R. and Mathews, R.L., “How to predict sieve tray entrainment and flooding,” Petro/Chem Engineer 33(10), p. 45, 1961. |
Hebert, D., “First-Principle Verus Data-Driven Models—Cost and Time and Skill Required to Develop an Application-Specific Model have Been Barriers to Using First-Principle Modeling Tools” http://www.controlglobal.com/articles/2008/200/ (2008). |
http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/.about.fkuo/sobol/ (2010). |
Hussein, “Adaptive Artificial Neural Network-Based Models for Instantaneous Power Estimation Enhancement in Electric Vehicles' Li-Ion Batteries”, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications, vol. 55, No. 1, Jan. 1, 2019, 840-849, XP011700440. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2017/040725 dated Oct. 16, 2017., entitled “Computer System and Method for the Dynamic Construction and Online Deployment of an Operation-Centric First-Principles Process Model for Predictive Analytics”. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/031636, dated Jul. 15, 2020, 9 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/034530, dated Jul. 24, 2020, 9 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion received for PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2020/055787, dated Jan. 29, 2021, 8 pages. |
Kister, Distillation Operation (Mechanical-Engineering), Book-mart Press, Inc., p. 376, 1990. |
Kister, H.Z. and Haas, J.R., “Predict entrainment flooding on sieve and valve trays,” Chemical Engineering Progress, 86(9), p. 63, 1990. |
Machine Learning in Python, http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2078195 (2011). |
Pantelides C. C, et al., “The online use of first-principles models in process operations: Review, current status and future needs”, Computers & Chemical Engineering, vol. 51, ISSN: 0098-1354, pp. 136-148 (2013). |
Potocnik P, et al, “Neural Net Based Hybrid Modeling of the Methanol Synthesis Process”, Neural Processing Letters, Kluwer Academic Publishers, No. 3, Jan. 1, 2000, 219-228. XP000949966. |
Psichogios, D.C. and Ungar, L. H., “A Hybrid Neural Network-First Principles Approach to Process Modeling”, AIChE Journal, 38: 1499-1511 (1992). |
Rakthanmanon, “Searching and Mining Trillions of Time Series Subsequences under Dynamic Time Warping,” the 18th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge discovery and Data Mining, Aug. 12-16, 2012. |
Random Forest Regressor, http://scikil-learn.org/slable/modules/generaled/sklearn.ensemble.RandomForestRegressor.hlml (2010). |
S. Joe and F. Y. Kuo, Remark on Algorithm 659: Implementing Sobol's quasirandom sequence generator, ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 29, 49-57 (2003). |
Silver, D., et al. “Mastering chess and shogi by self-play with a general reinforcement learning algorithm”, arXiv:1712.01815v1 [cs.AI] Dec. 5, 2017. |
Silver, D., et al., “Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search”, Nature 2016; 529:484-489. |
Tay et al., “Reluctant generalized additive modeling,” Department of Statistics, and Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Jan. 15, 2020, 20 pages. |
Venkatasubramanian , V., “The Promise of Artificial Intelligence in Chemical Engineering: Is II Here, Finally?” AIChE Journal, vol. 65-2, pp. 467-479 (Dec. 19, 2018). |
Yang, “A study of intermittent flow in downward inclined pipes,” Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Tulsa (1996). |
Yang, et al, “An integrated multi-task control system for fuel-cell power plants”, Decision and Control and European Control Conference (CDC-ECC), 2011 50th IEEE Conference, Dec. 12, 2011, 2988-2993. |
Yu et al., “Reluctant Interaction Modeling,” Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, 98105, Jul. 22, 2019, 32 pages. |
Zendehboudi et al., “Applications of hybrid models in chemical, petroleum, and energy systems: A systematic review,” Applied Energy, 228: 2539-2566 (2018). |
Zhang et al., “Unified model for gas-liquid pipe flow via slug dynamics-Part 1: Model development,” Trans. Of the ASME, 25: 266-273 (2003). |
Zhang et al., “Unified model for gas-liquid pipe flow via slug dynamics-Part 2: Model validation,” Trans. Of the ASME, 25: 274-283 (2003). |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2020/031636 dated Nov. 18, 2021, 11 pages. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for PCT/US2020/034530 dated Dec. 16, 2021, 8-pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for International Application No. PCT/US2019/054465, entitled, “Apparatus and Methods for Non-Invasive Closed Loop Step Testing with Controllable Optimization Relaxation,” dated Apr. 21, 2020. |
Machine Translation for JP 2004-265381 A, obtained Jun. 2022 (Year 2022). |
Fellini, R., et al., “Optimal design of automotive hybrid powertrain systems,” Proceedings First International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, IEEE, pp. 400-405 (1999). |
Moraru, I.I., et al., “Virtual Cell modelling and simulation software environment,” IET System Biology, vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 352-362 (Sep. 2008). |
Wetter, M., “A view on future building system modeling and simulation.” Building performance simulation for design and operation. Routledge, pp. 631-656. (Year: 2019). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20210034023 A1 | Feb 2021 | US |