Leveraging Inequality‐Constrained Data for Enhanced Liquidus Temperature Prediction in Nuclear Waste Glass Melts
Source abstract
Abstract
ABSTRACT Inequality‐constrained data are frequently discarded in engineering, leading to significant information loss in data‐scarce domains such as nuclear waste glass property modeling. This paper presents a nonparametric censored‐data regression framework based on an ‐norm optimization criterion that leverages slack variables to integrate left‐, right‐, and non‐constrained observations into training. Validation was performed on synthetic data and a neural network (NN) was developed for predicting spinel liquidus temperature () in high‐level nuclear waste glasses. This method improved the coefficient of determination () from 0.5780 to 0.8622 and reduced Mean absolute error (MAE) by 41.73% (i.e., from 54.15 to 31.56°) on deterministic values. The baseline NN failed to satisfy any inequality constraints while the proposed ‐norm NN satisfies 63.64% of the constraints. Ensemble analysis further showed improved uncertainty calibration, reducing Mean Absolute Calibration Error (MACE) from 0.2018 to 0.0906. The proposed framework effectively extracts actionable information from previously unusable data to enhance predictive accuracy, reduce epistemic uncertainty, and improve physical consistency in complex industrial applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Nuclear reactor physics and engineering · Glass properties and applications · Radiative Heat Transfer Studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering Brigham Young University Provo Utah USA
Nuclear Science Division Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland Washington USA
Funding
U.S. Department of Energy
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1111/1467‐9469.0017710.1111/1467‐9469.00177 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.watres.2017.05.03810.1016/j.watres.2017.05.038 ↗
3. 10.1016/S0169‐7439(01)00186‐110.1016/S0169‐7439(01)00186‐1 ↗
4. 10.1016/S1385‐8947(00)00380‐610.1016/S1385‐8947(00)00380‐6 ↗
5. 10.2903/j.efsa.2010.155710.2903/j.efsa.2010.1557 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.11105110.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111051 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.tifs.2023.04.01110.1016/j.tifs.2023.04.011 ↗
8. 10.1186/1471‐2369‐15‐14410.1186/1471‐2369‐15‐144 ↗
9. 10.1128/AEM.01203‐1810.1128/AEM.01203‐18 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.jspi.2003.07.00410.1016/j.jspi.2003.07.004 ↗
11. 10.1093/imaman/3.4.25910.1093/imaman/3.4.259 ↗
12. 10.1080/00401706.1993.1048503810.1080/00401706.1993.10485038 ↗
13. 10.1109/TSG.2015.238878410.1109/TSG.2015.2388784 ↗
14. 10.1021/es071301c10.1021/es071301c ↗
15. 10.1016/S0009‐2509(97)00101‐210.1016/S0009‐2509(97)00101‐2 ↗
16. 10.2307/228186810.2307/2281868 ↗
17. Regression Models and Life‐Tables10.1111/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x ↗
18. 10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19980130)17:2<219::AID‐SIM735>3.0.CO;2‐O10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19980130)17:2<219::AID‐SIM735>3.0.CO;2‐O ↗
19. 10.1080/01621459.1995.1047649110.1080/01621459.1995.10476491 ↗
20. 10.1155/2021/930747510.1155/2021/9307475 ↗
21. 10.1198/jasa.2009.tm0832310.1198/jasa.2009.tm08323 ↗
22. 10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19970315)16:5<497::AID‐SIM435>3.0.CO;2‐J10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19970315)16:5<497::AID‐SIM435>3.0.CO;2‐J ↗
23. 10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19960715)15:13<1387::AID‐SIM268>3.0.CO;2‐R10.1002/(SICI)1097‐0258(19960715)15:13<1387::AID‐SIM268>3.0.CO;2‐R ↗
24. 10.2307/190738210.2307/1907382 ↗
25. 10.1287/mnsc.44.12.165010.1287/mnsc.44.12.1650 ↗
26. 10.1080/02664763.2024.237393310.1080/02664763.2024.2373933 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.jeconom.2005.10.00210.1016/j.jeconom.2005.10.002 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.04.01310.1016/j.compchemeng.2014.04.013 ↗
29. 10.3390/pr1011236510.3390/pr10112365 ↗
30. A Tutorial on Conformal Prediction
31. 10.1214/aos/117634455210.1214/aos/1176344552 ↗
32. 10.3390/pr608010610.3390/pr6080106 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2015.12.00110.1016/j.compchemeng.2015.12.001 ↗
34. R. E.Gephart A Short History of Hanford Technical Report PNNL‐13605 (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) 2002).
35. 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.13243710.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132437 ↗
36. Hamel W. F. · 2006
37. 10.5802/crgeos.11110.5802/crgeos.111 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2010.03.03910.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2010.03.039 ↗
39. 10.1111/j.2041‐1294.2011.00063.x10.1111/j.2041‐1294.2011.00063.x ↗
40. 10.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2017.11.03310.1016/j.jnoncrysol.2017.11.033 ↗
41. J. D.Vienna G. F.Piepel D.‐S.Kim et al. 2016 Update of Hanford Glass Property Models and Constraints for Use in Estimating the Glass Mass to be Produced at Hanford Technical Report PNNL‐25835 (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) 2016).10.2172/1772236 ↗
42. 10.1002/asmb.44610.1002/asmb.446 ↗
43. T.Akiba S.Sano T.Yanase T.Ohta andM.Koyama “Optuna: A Next‐Generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework ” inProceedings of the 25th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining(ACM 2019) 2623–2631.10.1145/3292500.3330701 ↗