Please wait a minute...
浙江大学学报(工学版)  2026, Vol. 60 Issue (12): 2725-2734    DOI: 10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2026.12.018
土木工程、交通工程     
基于集成学习的盐穴造腔预测及工艺参数智能设计
陈加松1(),王桂九1,白雪峰1,段冲1,施锡林2,张桂民3,李小菲4,金辉4,李金龙4,*()
1. 国家管网集团储能技术有限公司,上海 200011
2. 中国科学院武汉岩土力学研究所,湖北 武汉 430071
3. 中国矿业大学 力学与土木工程学院,江苏 徐州 221116
4. 浙江大学 超重力科学与技术研究院,浙江 杭州 310058
Ensemble learning-based prediction of salt cavern leaching and intelligent design of process parameters
Jiasong CHEN1(),Guijiu WANG1,Xuefeng BAI1,Chong DUAN1,Xilin SHI2,Guimin ZHANG3,Xiaofei LI4,Hui JIN4,Jinlong LI4,*()
1. PipeChina Energy Storage Technology Co. Ltd, Shanghai 200011, China
2. Institute of Rock and Soil Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071, China
3. School of Mechanics and Civil Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China
4. Center for Hypergravity Experimental and Interdisciplinary Research, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
 全文: PDF(2249 KB)   HTML
摘要:

针对盐穴储气库水溶造腔设计效率低、依赖人工经验的问题,提出基于集成学习的代理模型与工艺参数优化方法. 依托自研盐穴单井水溶造腔模拟软件(SSCLS),构建包含 5?324 组样本的数据集,输入为地层数据、6个阶段工艺参数,输出为成腔体积与关键深度半径. 采用4类树模型作为基学习器、岭回归作为元学习器,构建代理模型,并提出 “参数生成-模型预测-偏差评估-软件复核” 的设计优化流程. 测试结果表明,模型体积预测平均绝对百分比误差为 2.85%,金坛 52 号井半径预测平均绝对误差为 2.17 m;单次预测耗时为ms级,较传统模拟效率提升 6 个数量级;所提出的参数优化方法可在 23 min内从 83 万组参数中筛选出最优方案,形态差异度仅为 4.1%. 该方法可用于盐穴储气库造腔方案初选和工艺参数快速比选.

关键词: 盐穴储气库;  水溶造腔;  神经网络;  集成学习;  优化设计    
Abstract:

An ensemble learning-based surrogate model and a process parameter optimization method were proposed to improve the efficiency of solution mining design for salt cavern gas storage and reduce dependence on manual experience. A dataset containing 5324 samples was constructed using the self-developed single-well salt cavern storage cavity leaching simulation (SSCLS) software. The input variables included stratigraphic data and six-stage process parameters, while the output variables consisted of cavern volume and radius at key depth. Four types of tree-based models were used as base learners, and ridge regression was adopted as the meta-learner to establish the surrogate model. A design optimization workflow consisting of parameter generation, model prediction, deviation evaluation, and software verification was further developed. The test results showed that the mean absolute percentage error of volume prediction was 2.85%, and the mean absolute error of radius prediction for Jintan Well 52 was 2.17 m. A single prediction was completed within milliseconds, improving the computational efficiency by six orders of magnitude compared with conventional simulation. The proposed optimization method screened 830000 candidate parameter sets within 23 min and obtained an optimized scheme with a morphology deviation of 4.1%. The method can be used for preliminary scheme selection and rapid comparison of process parameters in salt cavern gas storage construction.

Key words: salt cavern gas storage    solution mining    neural network    ensemble learning    design optimization
收稿日期: 2026-04-21 出版日期: 2026-10-21
CLC:  TP 393  
基金资助: 国家自然科学基金资助项目(42677186);国家管网集团储能技术有限公司科技项目(CNJS-SZZN202401).
通讯作者: 李金龙     E-mail: chenjs01@pipechina.com.cn;lijinlong@zju.edu.cn
作者简介: 陈加松(1986—)男,高级工程师,硕士,从事盐穴储气库建设及研究. orcid.org/0009-0007-7830-3043. E-mail:chenjs01@pipechina.com.cn
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
作者相关文章  
陈加松
王桂九
白雪峰
段冲
施锡林
张桂民
李小菲
金辉
李金龙

引用本文:

陈加松,王桂九,白雪峰,段冲,施锡林,张桂民,李小菲,金辉,李金龙. 基于集成学习的盐穴造腔预测及工艺参数智能设计[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(12): 2725-2734.

Jiasong CHEN,Guijiu WANG,Xuefeng BAI,Chong DUAN,Xilin SHI,Guimin ZHANG,Xiaofei LI,Hui JIN,Jinlong LI. Ensemble learning-based prediction of salt cavern leaching and intelligent design of process parameters. Journal of ZheJiang University (Engineering Science), 2026, 60(12): 2725-2734.

链接本文:

https://www.zjujournals.com/eng/CN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-973X.2026.12.018    或    https://www.zjujournals.com/eng/CN/Y2026/V60/I12/2725

正反循环t/dHi/mHo/mHp/mρB/(g·L?1)qV/(m3·h?1)
1460614046
1146152035050
1200354550060
2155506070080
12266575950100
11008090115050
表 1  6阶段造腔参数示例
组别w(z)/%
z = 2 mz = 4 mz = 6 m…z = 108 mz = 110 m
1959092…5554
2888584...4046
3151719…8082
表 2  地层数据示例
图 1  使用SSCLS软件模拟获取的部分造腔形态示例
组别w(z)/%$ \cdots $循环
方式
t/dHi/mHo/mHp/m$ \cdots $V/m3Rs(z)/m
z=2 mz=4 m$ \cdots $z=0$ \cdots $z=110 m
19590$ \cdots $1118131931$ \cdots $220 2110$ \cdots $35.27
29090$ \cdots $1105111731$ \cdots $199 1360$ \cdots $14.52
38388$ \cdots $2101122029$ \cdots $207 0230$ \cdots $9.24
47576$ \cdots $1104152031$ \cdots $209 5610$ \cdots $25.94
57470$ \cdots $1101121830$ \cdots $201 5530$ \cdots $17.53
62630$ \cdots $2134121834$ \cdots $206 6020$ \cdots $26.21
73835$ \cdots $1114111629$ \cdots $211 4820$ \cdots $7.98
表 3  盐穴水溶造腔代理模型数据集示例
基学习器树数量最大深度学习率行采样率列采样率特征采样L1正则化参数L2正则化参数分割所需
最小样本数
叶节点所需
最小样本数
XGBoost50060.050.80.8—0.21.0——
LightGBM50060.050.80.8—0.21.0——
Random Forest30012———sqrt——64
Gradient Boosting30060.050.8——————
表 4  集成学习模型参数表
图 2  SCCP-Stacking集成学习模型训练过程的损失变化图
图 3  SCCP-Stacking集成学习模型测试集体积预测值与真实值对比图
图 4  SCCP-Stacking集成学习模型测试集的形态预测MAE
图 5  SCCP-Stacking集成学习模型在测试集上的预测形态与真实形态对比图
阶段序号循环方式Hi/mHo/mHp/mt/dqV/(m3·h?1)
11?1 129.2?1 111.9?1 095.23846.2
21?1 117.1?1 065.5?1 053.39248.6
31?1 113.4?1 065.0?1 051.142069.1
41?1 099.1?1 035.7?1 035.219966.3
51?1 085.2?1 025.5?1 025.424162.8
61?1 080.1?1 016.2?1 015.419065.2
表 5  金坛52号盐穴储库造腔工艺参数表
夹层编号Hb,i/mHt,i/mwi/%
1?1 030?1 03122
2?1 044?1 04555
3?1 058?1 06013
4?1 067?1 06846
5?1 077?1 07852
6?1 083?1 08611
7?1 090?1 09360
8?1 100?1 10158
表 6  金坛52号盐穴储库地层数据表
图 6  金坛52储库造腔的预测结果(SCCP-Stacking集成学习模型及SSCLS软件)与声呐探测结果的对比图
图 7  盐穴储气库造腔工艺参数优化设计流程图
阶段序号循环方式t/dHi/mHo/mHp/mqV/(m3·h?1)ρB/(g·L?1)
1145?1 175?1 162?1 159950
21117?1 160?1 150?1 147480
32197?1 153?1 149?1 1131000
41297?1 133?1 098?1 095870
52120?1 128?1 110?1 085880
62166?1 120?1 112?1 075920
表 7  理想椭球体各阶段工艺参数表
图 8  针对理想椭球优化设计的工艺参数模拟结果图
1 丁国生, 魏欢 中国地下储气库建设20年回顾与展望[J]. 油气储运, 2020, 39 (1): 25- 31
Ding Guosheng, Wei Huan Review on 20 years’ UGS construction in China and the prospect[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2020, 39 (1): 25- 31
2 李建君 中国地下储气库发展现状及展望[J]. 油气储运, 2022, 41 (7): 780- 786
Li Jianjun Development status and prospect of underground gas storage in China[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2022, 41 (7): 780- 786
doi: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2022.07.004
3 李建中 利用岩盐层建设盐穴地下储气库[J]. 天然气工业, 2004, 24 (9): 119- 121
Li Jianzhong Using salt beds to build underground gas storages with salt caves[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2004, 24 (9): 119- 121
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0976.2004.09.035
4 姚威, 肖恩山 我国盐穴储气库建设技术发展现状及趋势[J]. 中国井矿盐, 2024, 55 (4): 7- 10
Yao Wei, Xiao Enshan The present situation and trend of salt cavern gas storage construction technology in China[J]. China Well and Rock Salt, 2024, 55 (4): 7- 10
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0335.2024.04.004
5 Bayram F, Bektasoglu I Determination of actual dissolution rates from some rock properties in construction of deep salt cavern for natural gas storage[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2020, 126: 104183
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2019.104183
6 Steding S, Kempka T, Zirkler A, et al Spatial and temporal evolution of leaching zones within potash seams reproduced by reactive transport simulations[J]. Water, 2021, 13 (2): 168
doi: 10.3390/w13020168
7 Najafimarghmaleki A, Dehghanpour H Evaluating fluid/rock interactions for energy storage in salt caverns: part I: brine-rock salt interactions[J]. Energy and Fuels, 2024, 38 (21): 20913- 20927
doi: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.4c03271
8 Cristescu N D, Paraschiv I The optimal shape of rectangular-like caverns[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences and Geomechanics Abstracts, 1995, 32 (4): 285- 300
doi: 10.1016/0148-9062(96)87206-8
9 李银平, 葛鑫博, 王兵武, 等 盐穴地下储气库水溶造腔管柱的动力稳定性试验研究[J]. 天然气工业, 2016, 36 (7): 81- 87
Li Yinping, Ge Xinbo, Wang Bingwu, et al Dynamic stability tests on tubing string for solution mining of a salt cavern UGS[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2016, 36 (7): 81- 87
doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2016.07.012
10 李建君, 王立东, 刘春, 等 金坛盐穴储气库腔体畸变影响因素[J]. 油气储运, 2014, 33 (3): 269- 273
Li Jianjun, Wang Lidong, Liu Chun, et al Factors affecting cavities distortion of Jintan Salt Cavern Gas Storage[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2014, 33 (3): 269- 273
doi: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2014.03.010
11 李银平, 马洪岭, 施锡林, 等 我国盐穴地下储库建设的挑战与对策研究: 从“金坛模式”到“XX模式”[J]. 岩土力学, 2024, 45 (10): 2859- 2869
Li Yinping, Ma Hongling, Shi Xilin, et al Challenges and countermeasures in salt cavern underground storage in China: from “Jintan mode” to “XX mode”[J]. Rock and Soil Mechanics, 2024, 45 (10): 2859- 2869
doi: 10.16285/j.rsm.2024.0310
12 丁国生 金坛盐穴地下储气库建库关键技术综述[J]. 天然气工业, 2007, 27 (3): 111- 113
Ding Guosheng General introduction on key technologies of the construction of Jintan underground salt cavern gas storage[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2007, 27 (3): 111- 113
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-0976.2007.03.037
13 Pajonpai N, Bissen R, Pumjan S, et al Shape design and safety evaluation of salt caverns for CO2 storage in northeast Thailand[J]. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2022, 120: 103773
doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103773
14 Cyran K, Kowalski M Shape modelling and volume optimisation of salt caverns for energy storage[J]. Applied Sciences, 2021, 11 (1): 423
doi: 10.3390/app11010423
15 Kunstman A S, Urbanczyk K M. The new UBRO version: leaching simulation code for asymmetrical caverns: result of applying to a Mogilno gas cavern [C]// Solution Mining Research Institute Fall 1994 Meeting. Hannover: Solution Mining Research Institute, 1994: 451–486.
16 Kunstman A, Urbanczyk K, Saygun I T. Application of WinUbro software to modelling of cavern development in trona deposit [C]// Solution Mining Research Institute Spring 2009 Technical Conference. Krakow: Solution Mining Research Institute, 2009.
17 何俊, 井岗, 陈加松, 等 盐穴储气库天然气阻溶恒压运行技术[J]. 油气储运, 2020, 39 (11): 1298- 1303
He Jun, Jing Gang, Chen Jiasong, et al Constant-pressure operation technology for salt cavern gas storage through solution mining under gas[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2020, 39 (11): 1298- 1303
18 李建君, 陈加松, 刘继芹, 等 盐穴储气库天然气阻溶回溶造腔工艺[J]. 油气储运, 2017, 36 (7): 816- 824
Li Jianjun, Chen Jiasong, Liu Jiqin, et al Re-leaching solution mining technology under natural gas for salt-cavern gas storage[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2017, 36 (7): 816- 824
19 Li J, Shi X, Yang C, et al Mathematical model of salt cavern leaching for gas storage in high-insoluble salt formations[J]. Scientific Reports, 2018, 8: 372
doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18546-w
20 Li J L, Tang Y, Shi X L, et al Modeling the construction of energy storage salt caverns in bedded salt[J]. Applied Energy, 2019, 255: 113866
doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113866
21 Sedaee B, Mohammadi M, Esfahanizadeh L, et al Comprehensive modeling and developing a software for salt cavern underground gas storage[J]. Journal of Energy Storage, 2019, 25: 100876
doi: 10.1016/j.est.2019.100876
22 Li J L, Yang C H, Shi X L, et al Construction modeling and shape prediction of horizontal salt caverns for gas/oil storage in bedded salt[J]. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 2020, 190: 107058
doi: 10.1016/j.petrol.2020.107058
23 Li J L, Shi X L, Zhang S Construction modeling and parameter optimization of multi-step horizontal energy storage salt caverns[J]. Energy, 2020, 203: 117840
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.117840
24 班凡生 盐穴储气库造腔技术现状与发展趋势[J]. 油气储运, 2017, 36 (7): 754- 758
Ban Fansheng Status and development trend of solution mining technologies used for salt-cavern gas storage[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2017, 36 (7): 754- 758
25 Jiang D, Li Z, Liu W, et al Construction simulating and controlling of the two-well-vertical (TWV) salt caverns with gas blanket[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2021, 96: 104291
doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2021.104291
26 班凡生. 盐穴储气库水溶建腔优化设计研究 [D]. 廊坊: 中国科学院研究生院, 2008.
Ban Fansheng. Study on optimization design of solution mining cavern for underground gas storage [D]. Langfang: Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2008.
27 Kang Y, Yuan G, Guan Y, et al Optimization design of gas injection and brine discharge process parameters in salt cavern gas storage[J]. International Journal of Thermofluids, 2025, 27: 101128
doi: 10.1016/j.ijft.2025.101128
28 王元刚, 高寒, 薛雨 盐穴储气库水溶造腔的影响因素[J]. 油气储运, 2020, 39 (6): 662- 667
Wang Yuangang, Gao Han, Xue Yu Influencing factors of solution mining for salt cavern gas storage[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2020, 39 (6): 662- 667
29 Li L, Gracie R, Dusseault M B, et al Modeling and verification of non-linear mineral dissolution processes with buoyancy effects[J]. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 2023, 161: 105257
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrmms.2022.105257
30 Chromik M, Korzeniowski W The impact of design modifications on the effectiveness of energy storage construction in a salt cavern according to enhanced technology based on laboratory tests[J]. Energies, 2025, 18 (4): 805
doi: 10.3390/en18040805
31 Wang J, AN G, Shan B, et al Parameter optimization of solution mining under nitrogen for the construction of a gas storage salt cavern[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2021, 91: 103954
doi: 10.1016/j.jngse.2021.103954
32 完颜祺琪, 丁国生, 赵岩, 等 盐穴型地下储气库建库评价关键技术及其应用[J]. 天然气工业, 2018, 38 (5): 111- 117
Wanyan Qiqi, Ding Guosheng, Zhao Yan, et al Key technologies for salt-cavern underground gas storage construction and evaluation and their application[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2018, 38 (5): 111- 117
doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2018.05.013
33 Harati S, Gomari S R Designing geometrically stable salt Caverns for underground hydrogen storage: a case study from northeast England[J]. Energy and Fuels, 2025, 39 (35): 17067- 17082
doi: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5c02957
34 Thakkar P, Khatri S, Dobariya D, et al Advances in materials and machine learning techniques for energy storage devices: a comprehensive review[J]. Journal of Energy Storage, 2024, 81: 110452
doi: 10.1016/j.est.2024.110452
35 Wang Z, Chen J, Wang G, et al Geometry prediction and design for energy storage salt caverns using artificial neural network[J]. Energy, 2024, 308: 132820
doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.132820
36 Derakhshani R, Lankof L, Ghaseminejad A, et al Artificial intelligence-driven assessment of salt caverns for underground hydrogen storage in Poland[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 14246
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-64020-9
37 郭子熙, 马骉, 张帅, 等 深度学习在油气产量预测中的研究进展与技术展望[J]. 天然气工业, 2024, 44 (9): 88- 98
Guo Zixi, Ma Biao, Zhang Shuai, et al Research status and prospects of deep learning in oil and gas production prediction[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2024, 44 (9): 88- 98
doi: 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2024.09.008
38 Araújo J G, Brito H G, Galvão M V, et al Deep learning models applied flowrate estimation in offshore wells with electric submersible pump[J]. Energies, 2025, 18 (19): 5311
doi: 10.3390/en18195311
39 孙宝江, 周梓强, 孙骞 油气钻采工程中的人工智能方法研究进展[J]. 石油学报, 2025, 46 (11): 2141- 2173
Sun Baojiang, Zhou Ziqiang, Sun Qian Progress on artificial intelligence methods in oil and gas drilling and production[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2025, 46 (11): 2141- 2173
40 张凯, 陈旭, 刘丕养, 等 基于深度学习贝叶斯模型平均代理的油藏自动历史拟合研究[J]. 钻采工艺, 2025, 48 (1): 147- 156
Zhang Kai, Chen Xu, Liu Piyang, et al Study on automatic history matching of reservoirs based on deep learning Bayesian model averaging surrogates[J]. Drilling and Production Technology, 2025, 48 (1): 147- 156
doi: 10.3969/J.ISSN.1006-768X.2025.01.18
41 王森, 向杰, 冯其红, 等 基于深度学习加速的油藏数值模拟自动历史拟合方法[J]. 中国石油大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48 (5): 103- 114
Wang Sen, Xiang Jie, Feng Qihong, et al Deep-learning-based acceleration method for automatic history matching of reservoir numerical simulation[J]. Journal of China University of Petroleum (Edition of Natural Science), 2024, 48 (5): 103- 114
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5005.2024.05.011
42 Fu S, Mao S, Carbonero A, et al Deep learning-based surrogate modeling for underground hydrogen storage[J]. Advances in Water Resources, 2025, 203: 105014
doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2025.105014
43 叶家巍, 吴克柳, 陈掌星, 等 基于傅里叶神经算子代理模型的地热开采生产制度优化[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2026, 45 (3): 158- 166
Ye Jiawei, Wu Keliu, Chen Zhangxing, et al Optimization of production system for geothermal exploitation based on surrogate model with Fourier Neural Operator[J]. Petroleum Geology and Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2026, 45 (3): 158- 166
doi: 10.19597/J.ISSN.1000-3754.202408029
44 马莅, 卢聪, 郭建春, 等 基于贝叶斯算法的致密储层压驱参数智能优化及其应用[J]. 大庆石油地质与开发, 2026, 45 (3): 91- 99
Ma Li, Lu Cong, Guo Jianchun, et al Intelligent optimization of fracturing-flooding parameters and its application in tight reservoirs based on Bayesian algorithm[J]. Petroleum Geology and Oilfield Development in Daqing, 2026, 45 (3): 91- 99
doi: 10.19597/J.ISSN.1000-3754.202502006
45 黄闻露, 阎建国, 任立龙, 等 模型反演和深度学习反演联合的地震波阻抗优化反演[J]. 物探与化探, 2024, 48 (4): 1076- 1085
Huang Wenlu, Yan Jianguo, Ren Lilong, et al Seismic impedance optimization inversion combining model inversion with deep learning inversion[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2024, 48 (4): 1076- 1085
doi: 10.11720/wtyht.2024.1288
46 鄢宇鑫, 安永凯, 闫雪嫚 基于自适应LSTM代理模型和MCMC方法的地下水污染源反演识别研究[J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2026, (5): 60- 67
Yan Yuxin, An Yongkai, Yan Xueman Groundwater pollution source inversion identification based on adaptive LSTM proxy model and MCMC method[J]. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 2026, (5): 60- 67
doi: 10.12396/znsd.2500976
47 许林, 马海春, 王京平, 等 高地应力高温条件裂隙介质地下水非线性渗流研究进展[J]. 地学前缘, 2026, 33 (1): 313- 327
Xu Lin, Ma Haichun, Wang Jingping, et al Advances in groundwater nonlinear seepage in fractured media under conditions of high in-situ stress and temperature[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2026, 33 (1): 313- 327
doi: 10.13745/j.esf.sf.2025.10.29
48 Rumelhart D E, Hinton G E, Williams R J Learning representations by back-propagating errors[J]. Nature, 1986, 323 (6088): 533- 536
doi: 10.1038/323533a0
49 Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J Long short-term memory[J]. Neural Computation, 1997, 9 (8): 1735- 1780
doi: 10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735
50 Cho K, Van Merriënboer B, Gulcehre C, et al. Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation [C]// Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Doha: ACL, 2014: 1724–1734.
51 Sajid M, Tanveer M, Suganthan P N Ensemble deep random vector functional link neural network based on fuzzy inference system[J]. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2025, 33 (1): 479- 490
doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2024.3411614
52 Mohammed A, Kora R A comprehensive review on ensemble deep learning: opportunities and challenges[J]. Journal of King Saud University Computer and Information Sciences, 2023, 35 (2): 757- 774
doi: 10.1016/j.jksuci.2023.01.014
53 Bergstra J, Bengio Y Random search for hyper-parameter optimization[J]. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2012, 13: 281- 305
doi: 10.1109/icitacee50144.2020.9239164
54 Li L, Jamieson K, Desalvo G, et al Hyperband: a novel bandit-based approach to hyperparameter optimization[J]. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2018, 18 (185): 1- 52
55 付星辉, 胡超, 何卉, 等 声纳探测在地下盐穴测腔中的实践应用与分析[J]. 中国井矿盐, 2023, 54 (1): 11- 13,17
Fu Xinghui, Hu Chao, He Hui, et al Practical application and analysis of sonar detection in underground salt cavern[J]. China Well and Rock Salt, 2023, 54 (1): 11- 13,17
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-0335.2023.01.004
56 王海峰 测腔声呐仪器原理、进展与展望[J]. 应用声学, 2024, 43 (3): 701- 708
Wang Haifeng Principle, progress and prospect of cavity measuring sonar instruments[J]. Journal of Applied Acoustics, 2024, 43 (3): 701- 708
doi: 10.11684/j.issn.1000-310X.2024.03.028
[1] 杨恒,王韶涵,董青,赵科渊,杨明亮. 基于注意力增强的跨模态多层融合网络的物体位姿估计[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(9): 1872-1880.
[2] 高帅帅,魏诚,惠飞,张竟成,宋汉辰. 基于时空特征与交互关系建模的换道意图预测[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(9): 2031-2041.
[3] 赵明华,吕雨萱,吕佳豪,陈逸飞,石程,胡静. 基于多尺度外观运动融合的视频异常检测[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(8): 1730-1738.
[4] 范业博,李逸成,刘勇,张薇. 面向图神经网络谣言检测器的高效攻击模型[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(8): 1739-1748.
[5] 刘慧雪,刘新倩,王帅,赵川,丁建国. 融合日志语义与图对抗学习的APT检测框架[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(8): 1749-1759.
[6] 刘慧霞,王荣景,高宇轩,曹猛,盛苏英,马友鹏. 基于自适应神经网络的无信号交叉口车辆无死锁调度算法[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(8): 1832-1840.
[7] 苏挺,许月萍,WANGQuanjun,钟华,蒋建群. 基于物理信息的城市洪涝多阶段替代模型[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(7): 1557-1566.
[8] 郑文军,黎志昆,韩守飞. 知识增强图Transformer的方面级情感分析[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(6): 1269-1276.
[9] 陈文强,冯琳越,王东丹,顾玉磊,赵轩. 融合动态风险图与多变量注意力机制的车辆轨迹预测模型[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(3): 455-467.
[10] 胡从裕,殷晨波,马伟,杨超,颜士宽. 基于改进CNN-LSTM的挖掘机作业对象识别[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(3): 536-545.
[11] 方芳,严军,郭红想,王勇. 基于时空注意力机制的轻量级脑纹识别算法[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(3): 633-642.
[12] 谢章郁,杨杰,欧阳嗣源,曾阳剑. 动态场景下融合YOLOv11n目标检测的优化ORB-SLAM3算法[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(2): 313-321.
[13] 王彦乐,张瑞峰,李锵. 融合全局信息和对比学习的图神经网络推荐模型[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(2): 351-359.
[14] 闫光辉,黄霄,常文文. 基于脑电多尺度特征和图神经网络的紧急制动行为识别[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(2): 404-414.
[15] 秦婷,李钊,闫玉婷,杜亚飞. 基于可变精度脉动阵列结构的卷积神经网络加速器[J]. 浙江大学学报(工学版), 2026, 60(11): 2406-2417.