评估用于数据驱动预测的粗糙度表征方法

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 MECHANICS
Jiasheng Yang, Alexander Stroh, Sangseung Lee, Shervin Bagheri, Bettina Frohnapfel, Pourya Forooghi
{"title":"评估用于数据驱动预测的粗糙度表征方法","authors":"Jiasheng Yang,&nbsp;Alexander Stroh,&nbsp;Sangseung Lee,&nbsp;Shervin Bagheri,&nbsp;Bettina Frohnapfel,&nbsp;Pourya Forooghi","doi":"10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>A comparative analysis is undertaken to explore the impact of various roughness characterization methods as input variables on the performance of data-driven predictive models for estimating the roughness equivalent sand-grain size <span>\\(k_s\\)</span>. The first type of model, denoted as <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PS}\\)</span>, incorporates the roughness height probability density function (p.d.f.) and power spectrum (PS), while the second type of model, <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PA}\\)</span>, utilizes a finite set of 17 roughness statistical parameters as input variables. Furthermore, a simplified parameter-based model, denoted as <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PAM}\\)</span>, is considered, which features only 6 input roughness parameters. The models are trained based on identical databases and evaluated using roughness samples similar to the training databases as well as an external testing database based on literature. While the predictions based on p.d.f. and PS achieves a stable error level of around 10% among all considered testing samples, a notable deterioration in performance is observed for the parameter-based models for the external testing database, indicating a lower extrapolating capability to diverse roughness types. Finally, the sensitivity analysis on different types of roughness confirms an effective identification of distinct roughness effects by <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PAM}\\)</span>, which is not observed for <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PA}\\)</span>. We hypothesize that the successful training of <span>\\(\\text {ENN}_\\text {PAM}\\)</span> is attributed to the enhanced training efficiency linked to the lower input dimensionality.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":559,"journal":{"name":"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion","volume":"113 2","pages":"275 - 292"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Roughness Characterization Methods for Data-Driven Predictions\",\"authors\":\"Jiasheng Yang,&nbsp;Alexander Stroh,&nbsp;Sangseung Lee,&nbsp;Shervin Bagheri,&nbsp;Bettina Frohnapfel,&nbsp;Pourya Forooghi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>A comparative analysis is undertaken to explore the impact of various roughness characterization methods as input variables on the performance of data-driven predictive models for estimating the roughness equivalent sand-grain size <span>\\\\(k_s\\\\)</span>. The first type of model, denoted as <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PS}\\\\)</span>, incorporates the roughness height probability density function (p.d.f.) and power spectrum (PS), while the second type of model, <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PA}\\\\)</span>, utilizes a finite set of 17 roughness statistical parameters as input variables. Furthermore, a simplified parameter-based model, denoted as <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PAM}\\\\)</span>, is considered, which features only 6 input roughness parameters. The models are trained based on identical databases and evaluated using roughness samples similar to the training databases as well as an external testing database based on literature. While the predictions based on p.d.f. and PS achieves a stable error level of around 10% among all considered testing samples, a notable deterioration in performance is observed for the parameter-based models for the external testing database, indicating a lower extrapolating capability to diverse roughness types. Finally, the sensitivity analysis on different types of roughness confirms an effective identification of distinct roughness effects by <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PAM}\\\\)</span>, which is not observed for <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PA}\\\\)</span>. We hypothesize that the successful training of <span>\\\\(\\\\text {ENN}_\\\\text {PAM}\\\\)</span> is attributed to the enhanced training efficiency linked to the lower input dimensionality.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":559,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion\",\"volume\":\"113 2\",\"pages\":\"275 - 292\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MECHANICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Flow, Turbulence and Combustion","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10494-024-00549-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MECHANICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们进行了对比分析,以探讨各种粗糙度表征方法作为输入变量对用于估算粗糙度等效砂粒尺寸 \(k_s\) 的数据驱动预测模型性能的影响。第一类模型,即 \(\text {ENN}_\text {PS}/\),包含粗糙度高度概率密度函数(p.d.f.)和功率谱(PS),而第二类模型,即 \(\text {ENN}_\text {PA}/\),利用有限的 17 个粗糙度统计参数作为输入变量。此外,我们还考虑了一种简化的基于参数的模型,称为 (\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\),其特点是只有 6 个输入粗糙度参数。这些模型基于相同的数据库进行训练,并使用与训练数据库相似的粗糙度样本以及基于文献的外部测试数据库进行评估。在所有测试样本中,基于 p.d.f. 和 PS 的预测误差稳定在 10% 左右,而在外部测试数据库中,基于参数的模型性能明显下降,这表明对不同粗糙度类型的外推能力较低。最后,对不同粗糙度类型的敏感性分析证实了 \(\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\) 能够有效识别不同的粗糙度效应,而 \(\text {ENN}_\text {PA}\) 则无法做到这一点。我们假设,\(\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\) 的成功训练归因于与较低的输入维度相关的训练效率的提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Assessment of Roughness Characterization Methods for Data-Driven Predictions

Assessment of Roughness Characterization Methods for Data-Driven Predictions

A comparative analysis is undertaken to explore the impact of various roughness characterization methods as input variables on the performance of data-driven predictive models for estimating the roughness equivalent sand-grain size \(k_s\). The first type of model, denoted as \(\text {ENN}_\text {PS}\), incorporates the roughness height probability density function (p.d.f.) and power spectrum (PS), while the second type of model, \(\text {ENN}_\text {PA}\), utilizes a finite set of 17 roughness statistical parameters as input variables. Furthermore, a simplified parameter-based model, denoted as \(\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\), is considered, which features only 6 input roughness parameters. The models are trained based on identical databases and evaluated using roughness samples similar to the training databases as well as an external testing database based on literature. While the predictions based on p.d.f. and PS achieves a stable error level of around 10% among all considered testing samples, a notable deterioration in performance is observed for the parameter-based models for the external testing database, indicating a lower extrapolating capability to diverse roughness types. Finally, the sensitivity analysis on different types of roughness confirms an effective identification of distinct roughness effects by \(\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\), which is not observed for \(\text {ENN}_\text {PA}\). We hypothesize that the successful training of \(\text {ENN}_\text {PAM}\) is attributed to the enhanced training efficiency linked to the lower input dimensionality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Flow, Turbulence and Combustion
Flow, Turbulence and Combustion 工程技术-力学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
72
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Flow, Turbulence and Combustion provides a global forum for the publication of original and innovative research results that contribute to the solution of fundamental and applied problems encountered in single-phase, multi-phase and reacting flows, in both idealized and real systems. The scope of coverage encompasses topics in fluid dynamics, scalar transport, multi-physics interactions and flow control. From time to time the journal publishes Special or Theme Issues featuring invited articles. Contributions may report research that falls within the broad spectrum of analytical, computational and experimental methods. This includes research conducted in academia, industry and a variety of environmental and geophysical sectors. Turbulence, transition and associated phenomena are expected to play a significant role in the majority of studies reported, although non-turbulent flows, typical of those in micro-devices, would be regarded as falling within the scope covered. The emphasis is on originality, timeliness, quality and thematic fit, as exemplified by the title of the journal and the qualifications described above. Relevance to real-world problems and industrial applications are regarded as strengths.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信