Cited by 57Algal biology and biofuel productionAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton DynamicsHydrological Forecasting Using AI

Machine learning methods modeling carbohydrate-enriched cyanobacteria biomass production in wastewater treatment systems

Open access
Rodríguez-Rángel, Héctor, Arias, Dulce María, Morales-Rosales, Luis Alberto, Gonzalez-Huitron, Victor, Valenzuela Partida, Mario, García, Joan·2022·Energies

Abstract

One-stage production of carbohydrate-enriched microalgae biomass in wastewater is a promising option to obtain biofuels. Understanding the interaction of water quality parameters such as nutrients, carbon, internal carbohydrates, and microbial composition in the culture is crucial for efficient operation and viable large-scale cultivation. Bioprocess models are an essential tool for studying the simultaneous effect of complex factors on carbohydrate accumulation, optimizing the process, and reducing operational costs. In this sense, we use a dataset obtained from an empirical model that analyzed the accumulation of carbohydrates in a single process (simultaneous growth and accumulation) from real wastewater. In this experiment, there were no ideal conditions (limiting nutrient conditions), but rather these limitations are guaranteed by the operating conditions (hydraulic retention times/nutrient or carbon loads). Thus, the model integrates 18 variables that are affected and not only carbohydrates. The effect of these variables directly influences the accumulation of carbohydrates. Therefore, this paper analyzes artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to develop a model to forecast biomass production in wastewater treatment systems. Carbohydrates were modeled using five artificial intelligence methods: (1) Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), (2) Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), (3) Long Short-Term Memory Network (LSTMs), (4) K-Nearest Neighbors (kNN), and (5) Random Forest (RF)). The AI methods allow learning how several components interact and if their combinations work faster than building the physical experiments over the same period of time. After comparing the five learning models, the CNN-1D model obtained the best results with an MSE (Mean Squared Error) = 0.0028. This result shows that the model adequately approximates the system’s dynamics.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/en15072500

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Patterson, J.; Gibson, A. Deep Learning: A Practitioner's Approach, 1st ed.; O'Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2017.
  2. Dillon, J.V.; Langmore, I.; Tran, D.; Brevdo, E.; Vasudevan, S.; Moore, D.; Patton, B.; Alemi, A.; Hoffman, M.; Saurous, R.A. Tensorflow distributions. arXiv 2017, arXiv:1711.10604. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rodríguez-Rángel, H., Arias, D. M., Morales-Rosales, L. A., Gonzalez-Huitron, V., Valenzuela Partida, M., & García, J.
Affiliations
  • Tecnológico Nacional de México, Instituto Tecnológico de Culiacán, Juan de Dios Bátiz 310 Pte. Col. Guadalupe, Culiacán C.P. 80014, Sinaloa, Mexico
  • Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX)
  • Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo (MX)
  • Instituto Tecnológico de Culiacán (MX)
  • GEMMA—Environmental Engineering and Microbiology Research Group, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTech, c/ Jordi Girona 1-3, Building D1, E-08034 Barcelona, Spain
Corresponding author
Morales-Rosales, Luis Alberto
Venue
Energies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-03-29
Volume
15
Issue
7
Pages
2500
ISSN
1996-1073 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4220988495
Cited by
56
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Energies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Autonomous University of Mexico (IA102821)
  • Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (613)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Aquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Hydrological Forecasting Using AI
Keywords
wastewater treatment, biofuel feedstock, carbohydrate accumulation, bioprocess modeling, artificial neural networks, convolutional neural networks, long short-term memory networks, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, hydraulic retention time, nutrient loading, carbon loading

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review