Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Intelligent prediction model for UCG state based on dual-source LSTM

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Underground coal gasification (UCG) is a serious attempt to clean and efficient use of coal, but it has not been able to solve the problem of stable production. Predicting UCG can provide effective guidance for control, which effectively solves this problem. Existing UCG prediction models are not accurate, and most of them can only predict a single variable, and cannot adequately predict the UCG state. The paper proposes the concept of combustible gas equivalents that can characterize the concentration of mixed gas through stoichiometry and material balance equations. The equivalent gradient is introduced to characterize the trends in equivalent, and the UCG state discrimination standard is established to evaluate the UCG state. Eventually, a dual-source long short-term memory (LSTM) prediction model is proposed for predicting UCG state. The experimental results show that compared with Support Vector Machine (SVM) and Back Propagation Neural Network (BPNN) prediction model, the model can make a better prediction of equivalent value and the accuracy of predicting trends in equivalent reaches 90.99%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thomas DJ (2016) Direct underground gasification of North Sea coal for future UK energy prosperity. Fuel 185:941–941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2016.08.032

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Verma A, Olateju B, Kumar A (2015) Greenhouse gas abatement costs of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification. Energy 85:556–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.03.070

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Imran M, Kumar D, Kumar N, Qayyum A, Saeed A, Bhatti MS (2014) Environmental concerns of underground coal gasification. Renew Sust Energ Rev 31:600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bhutto AW, Bazmi AA, Zahedi G (2013) Underground coal gasification: from fundamentals to applications. Prog Energ Combust 39(1):189–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2012.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Green M (2018) Recent developments and current position of underground coal gasification. P I Mech Eng A-J Pow 232(1):39–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957650917718772

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Su FQ, Itakura K, Deguchi G, Ohga K (2017) Monitoring of coal fracturing in underground coal gasification by acoustic emission techniques. Appl Energ 189:142–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.11.082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Perkins G (2018) Underground coal gasification—Part II: Fundamental phenomena and modeling. Prog Energ Combust 67:234–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2018.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Perkins G (2018) Underground coal gasification—Part I: Field demonstrations and process performance. Prog Energ Combust 67:158–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2018.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Xiao YT, Yin JH, Hu YF, Wang JZ, Yin HS, Qi HG (2019) Monitoring and control in underground coal gasification: current research status and future perspective. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Su FQ, Hamanaka A, Itakura K, Zhang WY, Deguchi G, Sato K, Takahashi K, Kodama J (2018) Monitoring and evaluation of simulated underground coal gasification in an ex-situ experimental artificial coal seam system. Appl Energ 223:82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.04.045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Laciak M, Kostur K, Durdan M, Kacur J, Flegner P (2016) The analysis of the underground coal gasification in experimental equipment. Energy 114:332–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Khan MM, Mmbaga JP, Shirazi AS, Trivedi J, Liu Q, Gupta R (2015) Modelling underground coal gasification—a review. Energies 8(11):12603–12668. https://doi.org/10.3390/en81112331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Guo R, Guo W, Hu H (2008) Texaco coal gasification quality prediction by neural estimator based on MSA and dynamic PCA. In: IEEE International Conference on Automation and Logistics, pp 2241–2246

  14. Krzemien A (2019) Dynamic fire risk prevention strategy in underground coal gasification processes by means of Artifical Neural Networks. Arch Min Sci 64(1):3–19. https://doi.org/10.24425/ams.2018.124991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dufaux A, Gaveau B, Létolle R, Mostade M, Noël M, Pirard JP (1990) Modelling of the underground coal gasification process at Thulin on the basis of thermodynamic equilibria and isotopic measurements. Fuel 69(5):624–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361(90)90149-K

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Laciak M, Kacur J, Kostur K (2016) The verification of thermodynamic model for UCG process. In: 17th IEEE International Carpathian Control Conference, pp 424–428

  17. Eftekhari AA, Wolf KH, Rogut J, Bruining H (2015) Mathematical modeling of alternating injection of oxygen and steam in underground coal gasification. Int J Coal Geo 150:154–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coal.2015.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Eftekhari AA, Wolf KH, Rogut J, Bruining H (2017) Energy and exergy analysis of alternating injection of oxygen and steam in the low emission underground gasification of deep thin coal. Appl Energ 208:62–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kaur J, Laciak M, Durdan M, Flegner P(2017) Utilization of Machine Learning method in prediction of UCG data. In: 18th International Carpathian Control Conference, pp 278–283

  20. Krzemien A (2019) Fire risk prevention in underground coal gasification (UCG) within active mines: temperature forecast by means of MARS models. Energy 170:777–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Prabu V, Jayanti S (2011) Simulation of cavity formation in underground coal gasification using bore hole combustion experiments. Energy 36(10):5854–5864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.08.037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Duan TH, Lu CP, Xiong S, Fu ZB, Zhang B (2016) Evaluation method of the energy conversion efficiency of coal gasification and related applications. Int J Energ Res 40(2):168–180. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Su FQ, Itakura KI, Deguchi G, Ohga K, Kaiho M (2015) Evaluation of energy recovery from laboratory experiments and small-scale field tests of underground coal gasification (UCG). J MMIJ 131:203–218. https://doi.org/10.2473/journalofmmij.131.203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Farivar F, Haghighi MS, Jolfaei A, Alazab M (2020) Artificial intelligence for detection, estimation, and compensation of malicious attacks in nonlinear cyber-physical systems and industrial IoT. IEEE Trans Ind Inform 16(4):2716–2725. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2019.2956474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Abbasi M, Mousavi N, Rafiee M, Khosravi MR, Menon VG (2020) A CRC-based classifier micro-engine for efficient flow processing in SDN-based internet of things. Mob Inf Syst. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/7641073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Vinayakumar R, Alazab M, Srinivasan S, Pham Q, Padannayil SK, Simran K (2020) A visualized botnet detection system based deep learning for the internet of things networks of smart cities. IEEE Trans Ind Appl. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2020.2971952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Meng S, Huang W, Yin X, Khosravi MR, Li Q, Wan S, Qi L (2020) Security-aware dynamic scheduling for real-time optimization in cloud-based industrial applications. IEEE Trans Ind Inform. https://doi.org/10.1109/TII.2020.2995348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mokarram M, Mokarram MJ, Khosravi MR, Saber A, Rahideh A (2020) Determination of the optimal location for constructing solar photovoltaic farms based on multi-criteria decision system and Dempster-Shafer theory. SCI REP-UK. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65165-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Menon VG, Jacob S, Joseph S, Sehdev P, Khosravi MR, Al-Turjman F (2020) An IoT-enabled intelligent automobile system for smart cities. Internet Things. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iot.2020.100213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tang M, Alazab M, Luo Y (2019) Big data for cybersecurity: vulnerability disclosure trends and dependencies. IEEE Trans Big Data 5(3):317–329. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBDATA.2017.2723570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lin W, Yin X, Wang S, Khosravi MR (2020) A Blockchain-enabled decentralized settlement model for IoT data exchange services. Wirel Netw. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11276-020-02345-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang F, Wang J (2012) Statistical analysis and forecasting of return interval for SSE and model by lattice percolation system and neural network. Comput Ind Eng 62(1):198–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2011.09.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Liao Z, Wang J (2010) Forecasting model of global stock index by stochastic time effective neural network. Expert Syst Appl 37(1):834–841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.05.086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Lin T, Horne BG, Giles CL (1998) How embedded memory in recurrent neural network architectures helps learning long-term temporal dependencies. Neural Networks 11(5):861–868. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-6080(98)00018-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Chen PA, Chang LC, Chang FJ (2013) Reinforced recurrent neural networks for multi-step-ahead flood forecasts. J Hydrol 497:71–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.05.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Guo T, Xu Z, Yao X, Chen HF, Aberer K, Funaya K (2016) Robust online time series prediction with recurrent neural networks. In: 3rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics, pp 816–825. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/DSAA.2016.92

  37. Graves A (2013) Generating sequences with recurrent neural networks. Comput Sci. arXiv:1308.0850

  38. Rahman A, Srikumar V, Smith AD (2018) Predicting electricity consumption for commercial and residential buildings using deep recurrent neural networks. Appl Energy 212:372–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.12.051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sundermeyer M, Schlüter R, Ney H (2012) LSTM neural networks for language modeling. In: 13th Annual Conference of the International-Speech-Communication-Association, pp 194–197.

  40. Sundermeyer M, Ney H, Schluter R (2015) From feedforward to recurrent LSTM neural networks for language modeling. IEEE-ACM Trans Audio Spe 23(3):517–529. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASLP.2015.2400218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9(8):1735–1780. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Cen ZP, Wang J (2019) Crude oil price prediction model with long short term memory deep learning based on prior knowledge data transfer. Energy 169:160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.12.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Liu H, Mi XW, Li YF (2018) Wind speed forecasting method based on deep learning strategy using empirical wavelet transform, long short term memory neural network and Elman neural network. Energ Convers Manage 156:498–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.11.053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Cao J, Li Z, Li J (2019) Financial time series forecasting model based on CEEMDAN and LSTM. Phys A 519:127–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2018.11.061

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Khadse AN (2015) Resources and economic analyses of underground coal gasification in India. Fuel 142:121–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.10.057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Wang Z, Song C, Chen T (2017) Deep learning based monitoring of furnace combustion state and measurement of heat release rate. Energy 131:106–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.05.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions. This work is supported “the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities” under Grant 2019BSCX14.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information and Control Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, 221116, China

    Yuteng Xiao, Hongsheng Yin & Kaijian Xia

  2. School of Mines, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou, 221116, China

    Tianhong Duan

  3. School of Computer Science and Technology, University of Chinese Academic of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China

    Honggang Qi

  4. Department of Informatics, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE17RH, UK

    Yudong Zhang

  5. Department of Computing, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia

    Alireza Jolfaei

Authors
  1. Yuteng Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hongsheng Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tianhong Duan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Honggang Qi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yudong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alireza Jolfaei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kaijian Xia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hongsheng Yin or Honggang Qi.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xiao, Y., Yin, H., Duan, T. et al. An Intelligent prediction model for UCG state based on dual-source LSTM. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 12, 3169–3178 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-020-01210-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-020-01210-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation