Cargando…

Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases

Dispersion prediction plays a significant role in the management and emergency response to hazardous gas emissions and accidental leaks. Compared with conventional atmospheric dispersion models, machine leaning (ML) models have both high accuracy and efficiency in terms of prediction, especially in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Rongxiao, Chen, Bin, Qiu, Sihang, Zhu, Zhengqiu, Wang, Yiduo, Wang, Yiping, Qiu, Xiaogang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6069387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29996467
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071450
_version_ 1783343485093412864
author Wang, Rongxiao
Chen, Bin
Qiu, Sihang
Zhu, Zhengqiu
Wang, Yiduo
Wang, Yiping
Qiu, Xiaogang
author_facet Wang, Rongxiao
Chen, Bin
Qiu, Sihang
Zhu, Zhengqiu
Wang, Yiduo
Wang, Yiping
Qiu, Xiaogang
author_sort Wang, Rongxiao
collection PubMed
description Dispersion prediction plays a significant role in the management and emergency response to hazardous gas emissions and accidental leaks. Compared with conventional atmospheric dispersion models, machine leaning (ML) models have both high accuracy and efficiency in terms of prediction, especially in field cases. However, selection of model type and the inputs of the ML model are still essential problems. To address this issue, two ML models (i.e., the back propagation (BP) network and support vector regression (SVR) with different input selections (i.e., original monitoring parameters and integrated Gaussian parameters) are proposed in this paper. To compare the performances of presented ML models in field cases, these models are evaluated using the Prairie Grass and Indianapolis field data sets. The influence of the training set scale on the performances of ML models is analyzed as well. Results demonstrate that the integrated Gaussian parameters indeed improve the prediction accuracy in the Prairie Grass case. However, they do not make much difference in the Indianapolis case due to their inadaptability to the complex terrain conditions. In addition, it can be summarized that the SVR shows better generalization ability with relatively small training sets, but tends to under-fit the training data. In contrast, the BP network has a stronger fitting ability, but sometimes suffers from an over-fitting problem. As a result, the model and input selection presented in this paper will be of great help to environmental and public health protection in real applications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6069387
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60693872018-08-07 Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases Wang, Rongxiao Chen, Bin Qiu, Sihang Zhu, Zhengqiu Wang, Yiduo Wang, Yiping Qiu, Xiaogang Int J Environ Res Public Health Article Dispersion prediction plays a significant role in the management and emergency response to hazardous gas emissions and accidental leaks. Compared with conventional atmospheric dispersion models, machine leaning (ML) models have both high accuracy and efficiency in terms of prediction, especially in field cases. However, selection of model type and the inputs of the ML model are still essential problems. To address this issue, two ML models (i.e., the back propagation (BP) network and support vector regression (SVR) with different input selections (i.e., original monitoring parameters and integrated Gaussian parameters) are proposed in this paper. To compare the performances of presented ML models in field cases, these models are evaluated using the Prairie Grass and Indianapolis field data sets. The influence of the training set scale on the performances of ML models is analyzed as well. Results demonstrate that the integrated Gaussian parameters indeed improve the prediction accuracy in the Prairie Grass case. However, they do not make much difference in the Indianapolis case due to their inadaptability to the complex terrain conditions. In addition, it can be summarized that the SVR shows better generalization ability with relatively small training sets, but tends to under-fit the training data. In contrast, the BP network has a stronger fitting ability, but sometimes suffers from an over-fitting problem. As a result, the model and input selection presented in this paper will be of great help to environmental and public health protection in real applications. MDPI 2018-07-10 2018-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6069387/ /pubmed/29996467 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071450 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Wang, Rongxiao
Chen, Bin
Qiu, Sihang
Zhu, Zhengqiu
Wang, Yiduo
Wang, Yiping
Qiu, Xiaogang
Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title_full Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title_fullStr Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title_short Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Hazardous Gas Dispersion Prediction in Field Cases
title_sort comparison of machine learning models for hazardous gas dispersion prediction in field cases
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6069387/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29996467
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15071450
work_keys_str_mv AT wangrongxiao comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT chenbin comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT qiusihang comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT zhuzhengqiu comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT wangyiduo comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT wangyiping comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases
AT qiuxiaogang comparisonofmachinelearningmodelsforhazardousgasdispersionpredictioninfieldcases