Machine learning approach for locating phase interfaces using conductivity probes

References

• Thelen, TV, Mairal, AP, Thorsen, CS, and Ramirez, WF, 1997. Application of ultrasonic backscattering for level measurement and process monitoring of expanded-bed adsorption columns, Biotechnol. Prog. 13 (5) (1997), pp. 681–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjertaker, BT, Johansen, GA, and Jackson, P, 2001. Level measurement and control strategies for subsea separators, J. Electron. Imaging 10 (3) (2001), pp. 679–689.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauptmann, P, Hoppe, N, and Puttmer, A, 2002. Application of ultrasonic sensors in the process industry, Measurement Sci. Technol. 13 (8) (2002), pp. R73–R83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maldonado, M, Desbiens, A, and del Villar, R, 2008. An update on the estimation of the froth depth using conductivity measurements, Minerals Eng. 21 (12) (2008), pp. 856–860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, JL, and Annan, AP, 1988. Ground-penetrating radar for high-resolution mapping of soil and rock stratigraphy, Geophys. Prospect. 37 (1988), pp. 531–551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.B. Bashforth and S. Koppenjan, Ground penetrating radar applications for hazardous waste detection, in Proceedings of SPIE, Underground and Obscured-Object Imaging and Detection, Vol. 1942, Orlando, FL, USA, 1993, pp. 56--64.
   Google Scholar
• Benson, RC, Glaccum, RA, and Noel, MR, 1984. Geophysical Techniques for Sensing Buried Wastes and Waste Migration, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory. Las Vegas: Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency; 1984.
   Google Scholar
• A. Uribe-Salas, M. Leroux, C.O. Gomez, J.A. Finch, and B.J. Huls, A conductivity technique for level detection in flotation cells, in Proceedings of an International Conference on Column Flotation, Vol. II, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, 1991, pp. 467--478.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, WQ, Wang, HX, Xie, CG, Brant, MR, and Beck, MS, 1993. "Design and Fabrication of Segmented Capacitance Level Sensor for an Oil Separation Tank". In: in Sensors VI: Technology, Systems and Applications, Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Sensors and their Applications held 12--15 September 1993 in Manchester (Sensors Series). London: Taylor and Francis; 1993. pp. 369–374.
   Google Scholar
• Warsito, W, and Fan, L-S, 2003. ECT imaging of three-phase fluidized bed based on three-phase capacitance model, Chem. Eng. Sci. 58 (3--6) (2003), pp. 823–832.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bukhari, SFA, and Yang, W, 2006. Multi-interface level sensors and new development in monitoring and control of oil separators, Sensors 6 (2006), pp. 380–389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, CN, Chen, SP, and Yang, GG, 2001. Fiber optical liquid level sensor under cryogenic environment, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 94 (1) (2001), pp. 69–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakravarthy, S, Sharma, R, and Kasturi, R, 2002. Noncontact level sensing technique using computer vision, IEEE Trans. Instrument. Measurement 51 (2) (2002), pp. 353–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golnabi, H, 2004. Design and operation of a fibre optic sensor for liquid level detection, Optics Lasers Eng. 41 (5) (2004), pp. 801–812.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler, A, and Guardo, R, 1994. A neural network image reconstruction technique for electrical impedance tomography, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 13 (4) (1994), pp. 594–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nooralahiyan, AY, and Hoyle, BS, 1997. Three-component tomographic flow imaging using artificial neural network reconstruction, Chem. Eng. Sci. 52 (13) (1997), pp. 2139–2148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nejatali, A, and Ciric, IR, 1998. An iterative algorithm for electrical impedance imaging using neural networks, IEEE Trans. Magnetics 34 (5) (1998), pp. 2940–2943.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ratajewicz-Mikolajczak, E, Shirkoohi, GH, and Sikora, J, 1998. Two ANN reconstruction methods for electrical impedance tomography, IEEE Trans. Magnetics 34 (5) (1998), pp. 2964–2967.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Lampinen, A. Vehtari, and K. Leinonen, Using Bayesian neural network to solve the inverse problem in electrical impedance tomography, in Proceedings of the 11th Scandinavian Conference on Image Analysis (SCIA'99), Vol. 1, 1999, pp. 87--93.
   Google Scholar
• Teague, G, Tapson, J, and Smit, Q, 2001. Neural network reconstruction for tomography of a gravel–air–seawater mixture, Measurement Sci. Technol. 12 (2001), pp. 1102–1108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaipio, JP, and Somersalo, E, 2004. Statistical and Computational Inverse Problems, Applied Mathematical Sciences. Vol. 160. New York: Springer; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng, K-S, Isaacson, D, Newell, J, and Gisser, D, 1989. Electrode models for electric current computed tomography, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 36 (1989), pp. 918–924.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somersalo, E, Cheney, M, and Isaacson, D, 1992. Existence and uniqueness for electrode models for electric current computed tomograpgy, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 52 (1992), pp. 1023–1040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vauhkonen, M, Vadász, D, Karjalainen, P, Somersalo, E, and Kaipio, J, 1998. Tikhonov regularization and prior information in electrical impedance tomography, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 45 (1998), pp. 486–493.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Vauhkonen, Electrical Impedance Tomography and Prior Information, PhD thesis, University of Kuopio, Kuopio, Finland, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Vauhkonen, PJ, Vauhkonen, M, Savolainen, T, and Kaipio, JP, 1999. Three-dimensional electrical impedance tomography based on the complete electrode model, IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 46 (9) (1999), pp. 1150–1160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheney, M, Isaacson, D, and Newell, JC, 1999. Electrical impedance tomography, SIAM Rev. 41 (1) (1999), pp. 85–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenblatt, F, 1958. The perceptron: A probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain, Psychol. Rev. 65 (6) (1958), pp. 386–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tikk, D, Kóczy, LT, and Gedeon, TD, 2003. A survey on universal approximation and its limits in soft computing techniques, Int. J. Approx. Reason. 33 (2) (2003), pp. 185–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.Y. Kung and J.N. Hwang, An algebraic projection analysis for optimal hidden units size and learning rates in back-propagation learning, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, San Diego, CA, USA, 1988, pp. 363--370.
   Google Scholar
• Huang, S-C, and Huang, Y-F, 1991. Bounds on the number of hidden neurons in multilayer perceptrons, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 2 (1) (1991), pp. 47–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murata, N, Yoshizawa, S, and Amari, S, 1994. Network information criterion – determining the number of hidden units for an artificial neural network model, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 5 (6) (1994), pp. 865–872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camargo, LS, and Yoneyama, T, 2001. Specification of training sets and the number of hidden neurons for multilayer perceptrons, Neural Comput. 13 (12) (2001), pp. 2673–2680.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teoh, EJ, Tan, KC, and Xiang, C, 2006. Estimating the number of hidden neurons in a feedforward network using the singular value decomposition, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 17 (6) (2006), pp. 1623–1629.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, DE, Hinton, GE, and Williams, RJ, 1986. "Learning internal representations by error propagation". In: Rumelhart, D.E., McClelland, J.L., and the PDP Research Group, , eds. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition. Volume 1: Foundations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1986. pp. 318–362.
   Google Scholar
• W.S. Sarle, Stopped training and other remedies for overfitting, in Proceedings of the 27th Symposium on the Interface of Computing Science and Statistics, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1995, pp. 352--360.
   Google Scholar
• Hagan, MT, and Menhaj, MB, 1994. Training feedforward networks with the Marquardt algorithm, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 5 (6) (1994), pp. 989–993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Riedmiller and H. Braun, A direct adaptive method for faster backpropagation learning: The RPROP algorithm, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks, San Francisco, CA, USA, 1993, pp. 586--591.
   Google Scholar
• Jolliffe, IT, 2002. Principal Component Analysis, . New York: Springer; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Dietterich, TG, 2000. "Ensemble methods in machine learning". In: Kittler, J., and Roli, F., eds. Multiple Classifier Systems, Vol. 1857 of LNCS. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2000. pp. 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Guyon, I, and Elisseeff, A, 2003. An introduction to variable and feature selection, J. Machine Learn. Res. 3 (2003), pp. 1157–1182.
   Google Scholar
• Subrahmanya, N, and Shin, YC, 2008. Automated sensor selection and fusion for monitoring and diagnostics of plunge grinding, J. Manufactur. Sci. Eng. 130 (3) (2008), pp. 1–11, 031014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Cun, Y, Denker, JS, and Solla, SA, 1990. "Optimal brain damage". In: Touretzky, D.S., ed. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems II. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann; 1990. pp. 598–605.
   Google Scholar
• Hassibi, B, and Stork, DG, 1993. "Second order derivatives for network pruning: Optimal brain surgeon". In: Hanson, S.J., Cowan, J.D., and Giles, C.L., eds. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 5. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann; 1993. pp. 164–171.
   Google Scholar
• T. Cibas, F. Soulié, P. Gallinari, and S. Raudys, Variable selection with optimal cell damage, in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Artificial Neural Networks (ICANN'94), Sorrento, Italy, 1994, pp. 727--730.
   Google Scholar
• Cibas, T, Soulié, F, Gallinari, P, and Raudys, S, 1996. Variable selection with neural networks, Neurocomputing 12 (2--3) (1996), pp. 223–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De, RK, Pal, NR, and Pal, SK, 1997. Feature analysis: Neural network and fuzzy set theoretic approaches, Pattern Recognition 30 (10) (1997), pp. 1579–1590.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Setiono, R, and Liu, H, 1997. Neural-network feature selector, IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 8 (3) (1997), pp. 654–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egmont-Petersen, M, Talmon, JL, Hasman, A, and Ambergen, AW, 1998. Assessing the importance of features for multi-layer perceptrons, Neural Networks 11 (4) (1998), pp. 623–635.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohavi, R, and John, G, 1997. Wrappers for feature subset selection, Artificial Intelligence 97 (1--2) (1997), pp. 273–324.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duch, W, 2006. "Filter methods". In: Guyon, I., Gunn, S., Nikravesh, M., and Zadeh, L.A., eds. Feature Extraction – Foundations and Applications. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2006. pp. 89–117.
   Google Scholar
• Aha, DW, and Bankert, RL, 1996. "A comparative evaluation of sequential feature selection algorithms". In: Fisher, D.H., and Lenz, H.-J., eds. Learning from Data: Artificial Intelligence and Statistics V. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1996. pp. 199–206.
   Google Scholar
• Inza, I, Larrañaga, P, Blanco, R, and Cerrolaza, AJ, 2004. Filter versus wrapper gene selection approaches in DNA microarray domains, Artificial Intelligence Med. 31 (2) (2004), pp. 91–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somol, P, Baesens, B, Pudil, P, and Vanthienen, J, 2005. Filter- versus wrapper-based feature selection for credit scoring, Int. J. Intelligent Syst. 20 (10) (2005), pp. 985–999.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone, M, 1974. Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. 36 (2) (1974), pp. 111–133.
   Google Scholar
• Reunanen, J, 2006. "Search strategies". In: Guyon, I., Gunn, S., Nikravesh, M., and Zadeh, L.A., eds. Feature Extraction – Foundations and Applications. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2006. pp. 119–136.
   Google Scholar
• Marill, T, and Green, DM, 1963. On the effectiveness of receptors in recognition systems, IEEE Trans. Information Theory 9 (1) (1963), pp. 11–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pudil, P, Novovičová, J, and Kittler, J, 1994. Floating search methods in feature selection, Pattern Recognition Lett. 15 (11) (1994), pp. 1119–1125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somol, P, Pudil, P, Novovičová, J, and Paclík, P, 1999. Adaptive floating search methods in feature selection, Pattern Recognition Lett. 20 (11--13) (1999), pp. 1157–1163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jain, AK, and Zongker, D, 1997. Feature selection: Evaluation, application, and small sample performance, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intelligence 19 (2) (1997), pp. 153–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kudo, M, and Sklansky, J, 2000. Comparison of algorithms that select features for pattern classifiers, Pattern Recognition 33 (1) (2000), pp. 25–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reunanen, J, 2003. Overfitting in making comparisons between variable selection methods, J. Machine Learn. Res. 3 (2003), pp. 1371–1382.
   Google Scholar
• Netgen – automatic mesh generator. Software available at http://www.hpfem.jku.at/netgen/.
   Google Scholar