All‐nonlinear static‐dynamic neural networks versus Bayesian machine learning for data‐driven modelling of chemical processes

In recent decades, the utilization of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) approaches have been explored for process modelling applications. However, different types of ML models may have contrasting advantages and disadvantages, which become critical during the optimal selection of a specific data‐driven model for a particular application as well as estimation of parameters during model training. This paper compares and contrasts two different types of data‐driven modelling approaches, namely the series/parallel all‐nonlinear static‐dynamic neural network models and models from a Bayesian ML approach. Both types of AI modelling approaches considered in this work have shown to significantly outperform several state‐of‐the‐art steady‐state and dynamic data‐driven modelling techniques for various performance measures, specifically, model sparsity, predictive capabilities, and computational expense. The performances of the proposed model structures and algorithms have been evaluated for two nonlinear dynamic chemical engineering systems—a plug‐flow reactor for vapour phase cracking of acetone for production of acetic anhydride and a pilot‐plant for post‐combustion CO2 capture using monoethanolamine as the solvent. For the validation data from the CO2 capture pilot plant, root mean squared error (RMSE) for flue gas outlet temperature, flowrate and CO2 concentration is 0.05%, 1.07%, and 5.0%, respectively, for the all‐nonlinear static‐dynamic neural networks and 0.1%, 1.75%, and 14.14%, respectively, for the Bayesian ML models. For the plug flow reactor data, the Bayesian ML models yield superior RMSE compared to the all‐nonlinear static‐dynamic neural networks when the measurement data are corrupted with Gaussian, auto‐correlated, or cross‐correlated noise.