2016
DOI: 10.1002/app.44252
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Starch foam material performance prediction based on a radial basis function artificial neural network trained by bare‐bones particle swarm optimization with an adaptive disturbance factor

Abstract: A novel model based on a radial basis artificial neural network and bare‐bones particle swarm optimization tuned with adaptive disturbance factor for predicting the performances of starch‐based foam materials was established. The ethylene–vinyl acetate/starch mass ratio, glycerin content, and NaHCO3 content were used as the input variables, whereas the tensile strength and rebound rate were taken as the output variables of the model. The prediction results show that model predictions were in great accordance w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Table 2, we compare performance of the MLR for resilience and GPR for tensile strength with that of more complicated models, including the back-propagation (BP) ANN, radial basis function (RBF) ANN, particle swarm optimization (PSO) RBF ANN, support vector machine (SVM), and bare-bones particle swarm optimization with adaptive disturbance factors (BBPSO-AD) RBF ANN reported in a previous study. 29 From the ARD and RMSE, it can be seen that the MLR and GPR lead to improved accuracy while maintaining simplicity. This is an important issue to consider when developing data-driven approaches for materials performance predictions.…”
Section: Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In Table 2, we compare performance of the MLR for resilience and GPR for tensile strength with that of more complicated models, including the back-propagation (BP) ANN, radial basis function (RBF) ANN, particle swarm optimization (PSO) RBF ANN, support vector machine (SVM), and bare-bones particle swarm optimization with adaptive disturbance factors (BBPSO-AD) RBF ANN reported in a previous study. 29 From the ARD and RMSE, it can be seen that the MLR and GPR lead to improved accuracy while maintaining simplicity. This is an important issue to consider when developing data-driven approaches for materials performance predictions.…”
Section: Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, our goal is to develop simple and accurate predictions for resilience and tensile strength based on mixture proportions of components for starch-based/EVA foam materials though datadriven methods, which have been applied in a wide variety of fields for similar purposes. [26][27][28][29] The former is achieved through a multivariate linear regression (MLR) and the latter through a nonlinear Gaussian process regression (GPR). We compare performance measurements based on the MLR and GPR with those based on more complicated models, such as the support vector machine (SVM) and different versions of the artificial neural network (ANN), and find that simpler models here could lead to higher accuracy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%