Home Technology Chapter 12 Data-driven prediction of thermal conductivity ratio in nanoparticle-enhanced 60:40 EG/water nanofluids
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Chapter 12 Data-driven prediction of thermal conductivity ratio in nanoparticle-enhanced 60:40 EG/water nanofluids

  • Himanshu Upreti ORCID logo , Ankita Pandey ORCID logo and Alok Kumar Pandey ORCID logo
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Flow Dynamics and Heat Transfer
This chapter is in the book Flow Dynamics and Heat Transfer

Abstract

This study investigates prediction of the thermal conductivity (TC) ratio of three nanofluids,nanofluids i.e., Al2O3 + EG/water, CuO + EG/water, and ZnO + EG/water using various ML (machine learningmachine learning) and NNneural network (neural network) methods. The primary objective is to compare the performance of eleven regression techniques, including RFR (random forest regressor)random forest regressor, LR (linear regression), decision tree regressor, K neighbor regressor (KNN), support vector regressor, Lasso regression, ridge regression, XG BoostXG boost regressor, artificial neural network, Gaussian Naïve BayesGaussian naïve Bayes, and polynomial regressor, in predicting the TC ratioTC ratio. The dataset, sourced from a thermophysical properties database, consists of 131 rows and 6 columns (corresponding to nanoparticle type, fluid ratio 60:40 EG/water, volume fractionvolume fraction, temperature, nanoparticle size, and TC ratio). The models are evaluated based on performance metrics, for example, MAE (mean absolute error)mean absolute error, MSE (mean square error), and R 2 . The results reveal that the Ridge regression consistently outperforms other models, achieving the highest R 2 score for ZnO and CuO nanofluids, while linear regression shows superior performance for Al2O3 nanofluid. The study demonstrates the potential of MLmachine learning techniques for accurate predictions of nanofluid properties and highlights the importance of model selection in achieving optimal results. The findings provide valuable insights for future applications of MLmachine learning in nanofluid research and engineering. Additionally, an explainable MLmachine learning technique, SHAP, is used to interpret the output obtained from the MLmachine learning models.

Abstract

This study investigates prediction of the thermal conductivity (TC) ratio of three nanofluids,nanofluids i.e., Al2O3 + EG/water, CuO + EG/water, and ZnO + EG/water using various ML (machine learningmachine learning) and NNneural network (neural network) methods. The primary objective is to compare the performance of eleven regression techniques, including RFR (random forest regressor)random forest regressor, LR (linear regression), decision tree regressor, K neighbor regressor (KNN), support vector regressor, Lasso regression, ridge regression, XG BoostXG boost regressor, artificial neural network, Gaussian Naïve BayesGaussian naïve Bayes, and polynomial regressor, in predicting the TC ratioTC ratio. The dataset, sourced from a thermophysical properties database, consists of 131 rows and 6 columns (corresponding to nanoparticle type, fluid ratio 60:40 EG/water, volume fractionvolume fraction, temperature, nanoparticle size, and TC ratio). The models are evaluated based on performance metrics, for example, MAE (mean absolute error)mean absolute error, MSE (mean square error), and R 2 . The results reveal that the Ridge regression consistently outperforms other models, achieving the highest R 2 score for ZnO and CuO nanofluids, while linear regression shows superior performance for Al2O3 nanofluid. The study demonstrates the potential of MLmachine learning techniques for accurate predictions of nanofluid properties and highlights the importance of model selection in achieving optimal results. The findings provide valuable insights for future applications of MLmachine learning in nanofluid research and engineering. Additionally, an explainable MLmachine learning technique, SHAP, is used to interpret the output obtained from the MLmachine learning models.

Downloaded on 21.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783111661674-012/html
Scroll to top button