Li, C. et al. India Is overtaking china as the world’s largest emitter of anthropogenic sulfur dioxide. Sci. Rep. 7(1), 14304 (2017).
Koukouli, M. E. et al. Anthropogenic sulphur dioxide load over China as observed from different satellite sensors. Atmos. Environ. 145, 45–59 (2016).
Wakefield J. A toxicological review of the products of combustion. Health Protection Agency, Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental…; 2010.
Hu, Y. et al. Optimization and evaluation of SO2 emissions based on WRF-Chem and 3DVAR data assimilation. Remote Sensing 14(1), 220 (2022).
Zhou, F. & Fan, Y. Determination of the influence of fuel switching regulation on the sulfur dioxide content of air in a port area using DID MODEL. Adv. Meteorol. 2021, 6679682 (2021).
Lavery, C. B., Marrugo-Hernandez, J. J., Sui, R., Dowling, N. I. & Marriott, R. A. The effect of methanol in the first catalytic converter of the Claus sulfur recovery unit. Fuel 238, 385–393 (2019).
Li, J., Kobayashi, N. & Hu, Y. The activated coke preparation for SO2 adsorption by using flue gas from coal power plant. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 47(1), 118–127 (2008).
Yang, C. et al. Characterization of chemical fingerprints of ultralow sulfur fuel oils using gas chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Fuel 343, 127948 (2023).
Kaminski, J. Technologies and costs of SO2-emissions reduction for the energy sector. Appl. Energy 75(3), 165–172 (2003).
Duan, Y., Duan, L., Wang, J. & Anthony, E. J. Observation of simultaneously low CO, NOx and SO2 emission during oxy-coal combustion in a pressurized fluidized bed. Fuel 242, 374–381 (2019).
Ma, X., Kaneko, T., Xu, G. & Kato, K. Influence of gas components on removal of SO2 from flue gas in the semidry FGD process with a powder–particle spouted bed. Fuel 80(5), 673–680 (2001).
Gound, T. U., Ramachandran, V. & Kulkarni, S. Various methods to reduce SO2 emission-a review. Int. J. Ethics Eng. Manage. Educ. 1(1), 1–6 (2014).
Córdoba, P. Status of Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) systems from coal-fired power plants: Overview of the physic-chemical control processes of wet limestone FGDs. Fuel 144, 274–286 (2015).
Suárez-Ruiz, I. & Ward, C. R. Chapter 4: Coal combustion. In Applied coal petrology (eds Suárez-Ruiz, I. & Crelling, J. C.) 85–117 (Elsevier, 2008).
Ren, Y. et al. Sulfur trioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants in China and implications on future control. Fuel 261, 116438 (2020).
Hall, B. W., Singer, C., Jozewicz, W., Sedman, C. B. & Maxwell, M. A. Current status of the ADVACATE process for flue gas desulfurization. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 42(1), 103–110 (1992).
Arthur LF. Silicate sorbents for flue gas cleaning. The University of Texas at Austin; 1998.
Dzhonova, D., Razkazova-Velkova, E., Ljutzkanov, L., Kolev, N. & Kolev, D. Energy efficient SO2 removal from flue gases using the method of Wellman-Lord. J. Chem. Technol. Metall. 48, 457–464 (2013).
Özyuğuran A, Mericboyu A. Using Hydrated Lime and Dolomite for Sulfur Dioxide Removal from Flue Gases. 2012.
Xu, X.-J. et al. Simultaneous removal of NOX and SO2 from flue gas in an integrated FGD-CABR system by sulfur cycling-mediated Fe (II) EDTA regeneration. Environ. Res. 205, 112541 (2022).
Stanienda-Pilecki, K. J. The use of limestones built of carbonate phases with increased Mg content in processes of flue gas desulfurization. Minerals 11(10), 1044 (2021).
Fedorchenko I, Oliinyk A, Fedoronchak T, Zaiko T, Kharchenko A. The development of a genetic method to optimize the flue gas desulfurization process. MoMLeT+ DS. 2021:161–73.
Tadepalli, A., Pujari, K. N. & Mitra, K. A crystallization case study toward optimization of expensive to evaluate mathematical models using Bayesian approach. Mater. Manufact. Process. 38(16), 2127–2134 (2023).
Zhu, X. et al. Application of machine learning methods for estimating and comparing the sulfur dioxide absorption capacity of a variety of deep eutectic solvents. J. Clean. Product. 363, 132465 (2022).
Grimaccia, F., Montini, M., Niccolai, A., Taddei, S. & Trimarchi, S. A machine learning-based method for modelling a proprietary SO2 removal system in the oil and gas sector. Energies 15(23), 9138 (2022).
Xie Y, Chi T, Yu Z, Chen X. SO2 prediction for wet flue gas desulfurization based on improved long and short-term memory. In: 2022 4th International Conference on Control Systems, Mathematical Modeling, Automation and Energy Efficiency (SUMMA). 2022, pp. 321–5
Yu, H., Gao, M., Zhang, H. & Chen, Y. Dynamic modeling for SO2-NOx emission concentration of circulating fluidized bed units based on quantum genetic algorithm: Extreme learning machine. J. Clean. Product. 324, 129170 (2021).
Yin, X. et al. Enhancing deep learning for the comprehensive forecast model in flue gas desulfurization systems. Control Eng. Pract. 138, 105587 (2023).
Makomere, R., Rutto, H., Koech, L. & Banza, M. The use of artificial neural network (ANN) in dry flue gas desulphurization modelling: Levenberg–Marquardt (LM) and Bayesian regularization (BR) algorithm comparison. Canad. J. Chem. Eng. 101(6), 3273–3286 (2023).
Uddin, G. M. et al. Artificial intelligence-based emission reduction strategy for limestone forced oxidation flue gas desulfurization system. J. Energy Resour. Technol. 142(9), 092103 (2020).
Adams, D., Oh, D., Kim, D. & Lee, C. Prediction of SOx–NOx emission from a coal-fired CFB power plant with machine learning: Plant data learned by deep neural network and least square support vector machine. J. Clean. Product. 270, 122310 (2020).
Zurada J. Introduction to artificial neural systems. West Publishing Co.; 1992.
Agatonovic-Kustrin, S. & Beresford, R. Basic concepts of artificial neural network (ANN) modeling and its application in pharmaceutical research. J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. Anal. 22(5), 717–727 (2000).
Naderi K, Foroughi A, Ghaemi A. Analysis of hydraulic performance in a structured packing column for air/water system: RSM and ANN modeling. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2023:109521.
Khoshraftar, Z. & Ghaemi, A. Modeling and prediction of CO2 partial pressure in methanol solution using artificial neural networks. Curr. Res. Green Sustain. Chem. 6, 100364 (2023).
Ghaemi, A., Karimi Dehnavi, M. & Khoshraftar, Z. Exploring artificial neural network approach and RSM modeling in the prediction of CO2 capture using carbon molecular sieves. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 7, 100310 (2023).
Zafari, P. & Ghaemi, A. Modeling and optimization of CO2 capture into mixed MEA-PZ amine solutions using machine learning based on ANN and RSM models. Results Eng. 19, 101279 (2023).
Kashaninejad, M., Dehghani, A. A. & Kashiri, M. Modeling of wheat soaking using two artificial neural networks (MLP and RBF). J. Food Eng. 91(4), 602–607 (2009).
Leite, M. S. et al. Modeling of milk lactose removal by column adsorption using artificial neural networks: Mlp and Rbf. Chem. Ind. Chem. Eng. Quart. 25(4), 369–382 (2019).
Sharif, A. A. Chapter 7: Numerical modeling and simulation. In Numerical models for submerged breakwaters (ed. Sharif Ahmadian, A.) 109–126 (Butterworth-Heinemann, 2016).
Hemmati, A., Ghaemi, A. & Asadollahzadeh, M. RSM and ANN modeling of hold up, slip, and characteristic velocities in standard systems using pulsed disc-and-doughnut contactor column. Sep. Sci. Technol. 56(16), 2734–2749 (2021).
Torkashvand, A., Ramezanipour Penchah, H. & Ghaemi, A. Exploring of CO2 adsorption behavior by Carbazole-based hypercrosslinked polymeric adsorbent using deep learning and response surface methodology. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 19(9), 8835–8856 (2022).
Speiser, J. L., Miller, M. E., Tooze, J. & Ip, E. A comparison of random forest variable selection methods for classification prediction modeling. Exp. Syst. Appl. 134, 93–101 (2019).
Cano, G. et al. Automatic selection of molecular descriptors using random forest: Application to drug discovery. Exp. Syst. Appl. 72, 151–159 (2017).
Chehreh Chelgani, S., Matin, S. S. & Hower, J. C. Explaining relationships between coke quality index and coal properties by Random Forest method. Fuel 182, 754–760 (2016).
Park, S. et al. Predicting the salt adsorption capacity of different capacitive deionization electrodes using random forest. Desalination 537, 115826 (2022).
Ghazwani, M. & Begum, M. Y. Computational intelligence modeling of hyoscine drug solubility and solvent density in supercritical processing: Gradient boosting, extra trees, and random forest models. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 10046 (2023).
Hameed, M. M., AlOmar, M. K., Khaleel, F. & Al-Ansari, N. An extra tree regression model for discharge coefficient prediction: Novel, practical applications in the hydraulic sector and future research directions. Math. Problem. Eng. 2021, 7001710 (2021).
Ahmad, M. W., Reynolds, J. & Rezgui, Y. Predictive modelling for solar thermal energy systems: A comparison of support vector regression, random forest, extra trees and regression trees. J. Clean. Product. 203, 810–821 (2018).
Aftab, R. A. et al. Support vector regression-based model for phenol adsorption in rotating packed bed adsorber. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30(28), 71637–71648 (2023).
Kooh, M. R. R., Thotagamuge, R., Chou Chau, Y.-F., Mahadi, A. H. & Lim, C. M. Machine learning approaches to predict adsorption capacity of Azolla pinnata in the removal of methylene blue. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 132, 104134 (2022).
Song, Z., Shi, H., Zhang, X. & Zhou, T. Prediction of CO2 solubility in ionic liquids using machine learning methods. Chem. Eng. Sci. 223, 115752 (2020).
Khoshraftar, Z. & Ghaemi, A. Modeling of CO2 solubility in piperazine (PZ) and diethanolamine (DEA) solution via machine learning approach and response surface methodology. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 8, 100457 (2023).
Belyadi, H. & Haghighat, A. Chapter 5—Supervised learning. In Machine learning guide for oil and gas using python (eds Belyadi, H. & Haghighat, A.) 169–295 (Gulf Professional Publishing, 2021).
Fathalian, F., Aarabi, S., Ghaemi, A. & Hemmati, A. Intelligent prediction models based on machine learning for CO2 capture performance by graphene oxide-based adsorbents. Sci. Rep. 12(1), 21507 (2022).
Pujari, K. N., Miriyala, S. S., Mittal, P. & Mitra, K. Better wind forecasting using evolutionary neural architecture search driven green deep learning. Exp. Syst. Appl. 214, 119063 (2023).
Inapakurthi, R. K., Naik, S. S. & Mitra, K. Toward faster operational optimization of cascaded MSMPR crystallizers using multiobjective support vector regression. Indu. Eng. Chem. Res. 61(31), 11518–11533 (2022).
Miriyala, S. S., Pujari, K. N., Naik, S. & Mitra, K. Evolutionary neural architecture search for surrogate models to enable optimization of industrial continuous crystallization process. Powder Technol. 405, 117527 (2022).
Miriyala, S. S., Mittal, P., Majumdar, S. & Mitra, K. Comparative study of surrogate approaches while optimizing computationally expensive reaction networks. Chem. Eng. Sci. 140, 44–61 (2016).
Xiao, S. & Jiang, Y. Statistical research on effect of desulfurated parameters on desulfurization efficiency. IOP Confer. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 146(1), 012070 (2018).
Elder, A. C., Bhattacharyya, S., Nair, S. & Orlando, T. M. Reactive Adsorption of Humid SO2 on metal-organic framework nanosheets. J. Phys. Chem. C 122(19), 10413–10422 (2018).
Chu, C.-Y., Hsueh, K.-W. & Hwang, S.-J. Sulfation and attrition of calcium sorbent in a bubbling fluidized bed. J. Hazardous Mater. 80(1), 119–133 (2000).
Liu, C.-F., Shih, S.-M. & Lin, R.-B. Effect of Ca(OH)2/fly ash weight ratio on the kinetics of the reaction of Ca(OH)2/fly ash sorbents with SO2 at low temperatures. Chem. Eng. Sci. 59(21), 4653–4655 (2004).
Izquierdo, J. F., Fité, C., Cunill, F., Iborra, M. & Tejero, J. Kinetic study of the reaction between sulfur dioxide and calcium hydroxide at low temperature in a fixed-bed reactor. J. Hazardous Mater. 76, 113–123 (2000).
Chisholm, P. N. & Rochelle, G. T. Absorption of HCl and SO2 from humidified flue gas with calcium silicate solids. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39(4), 1048–1060 (2000).
Zhao, Y., Han, Y. & Chen, C. Simultaneous removal of SO2 and NO from flue gas using multicomposite active absorbent. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 51(1), 480–486 (2012).
Fei, T. & Zhang, L. SO2 absorption by multiple biomass ash types. ACS Omega 6(3), 1872–1882 (2021).
Inapakurthi, R. K., Miriyala, S. S. & Mitra, K. Deep learning based dynamic behavior modelling and prediction of particulate matter in air. Chem. Eng. J. 426, 131221 (2021).
Saltelli A, Ratto M, Andres T, Campolongo F, Cariboni J, Gatelli D, et al. Global sensitivity analysis. The Primer. 2008.
