温廷新, 陈晓宇, 邵良杉, 窦融, 魏鹏. 参数优化GA-ELM模型在露天煤矿抛掷爆破的预测[J]. 煤炭学报, 2017, (3). DOI: 10.13225/j.cnki.jccs.2016.0572
引用本文: 温廷新, 陈晓宇, 邵良杉, 窦融, 魏鹏. 参数优化GA-ELM模型在露天煤矿抛掷爆破的预测[J]. 煤炭学报, 2017, (3). DOI: 10.13225/j.cnki.jccs.2016.0572
WEN Ting-xin, CHEN Xiao-yu, SHAO Liang-shan, DOU Rong, WEI Peng. Prediction on parameters optimized GA-ELM model for cast blasting in open-pit mine[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2017, (3). DOI: 10.13225/j.cnki.jccs.2016.0572
Citation: WEN Ting-xin, CHEN Xiao-yu, SHAO Liang-shan, DOU Rong, WEI Peng. Prediction on parameters optimized GA-ELM model for cast blasting in open-pit mine[J]. Journal of China Coal Society, 2017, (3). DOI: 10.13225/j.cnki.jccs.2016.0572

参数优化GA-ELM模型在露天煤矿抛掷爆破的预测

Prediction on parameters optimized GA-ELM model for cast blasting in open-pit mine

  • 摘要: 为有效指导露天煤矿制定正确生产计划,提高露天煤矿抛掷爆破预测的准确率,在分析露天煤矿抛掷爆破影响因素的基础上,通过"试错法"确定模型最优隐含层节点参数,进而提出一种参数优化后遗传算法(GA)和极限学习机(ELM)相结合的抛掷爆破预测模型。选取网络的输入输出相关参数,针对现有ELM输入权值矩阵和隐含层偏差,采用遗传算法对其进行优化选择;利用某露天煤矿抛掷爆破监测数据对该模型进行实例分析,并将RBF,BP,SVM,GA-BP模型预测结果与该模型进行对比分析;并引入Weibull模型,通过预测控制参数ɑ,β模拟爆堆形态。研究结果表明:(1)通过"试错法"确定GA-ELM模型最优隐含层节点数为39,有效降低系统的仿真误差,该参数下仿真误差值为0.137 7;(2)相较于传统ELM预测模型,通过遗传算法优化后,有效抛掷率,松散系数以及抛掷距离均得出更小的均方误差MSE值(0.258 0,1.748 5×10-4,3.618 4)和更高的决定系数R2值(0.986 4,0.995 3,0.970 6),改进后的GA-ELM具有更好的拟合效果和泛化能力;(3)通过与其他智能算法如BP,RBF,SVM,GA-BP相比,改进后的GA-ELM测试结果(均方误差,决定系数,仿真误差)明显优于其他预测模型,有效提高预测精度;(4)利用训练完成的GA-ELM网络预测爆堆形态时,控制参数a,β的预测误差均未超过5%,预测爆堆曲线接近真实爆堆曲线。

     

    Abstract: In order to make a correct production plan effectively and improve the accuracy of cast blasting in open-pit mine,based on the analysis of cast blasting factors,the optimized hidden layer node parameters are determined by “tri- al-and-error” and then one kind prediction model is proposed with the combination of Genetic Algorithm ( GA) and Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). On the basis of network input and output parameters’ selection,the optimization and selection are made using GA for ELM model’s input weight matrix and hidden layer deviation. Using a cast blas- ting monitoring data in an open-pit mine,the model analysis was conducted,then the prediction results of RBF,BP, SVM,and GA-BP models were compared with the model results. In addition,Weibull model was introduced to simulate the coal blasting form by predicting control parameters a,β. The results show that:① The optimal hidden layer node number is 39,which reduces the system simulation error effectively,and the simulation error is 0. 137 7;② Compared with traditional ELM prediction model,after optimized by GA,Effective Casting Blasting Ratio,Loose Coefficient and Cast Distance all have lower Mean Square Error (MSE:0. 258 0,1. 748 5×10-4 ,3. 618 4) and higher Decision Coeffi- cients (R2 :0. 986 4,0. 995 3,0. 970 6). Improved GA-ELM model has a better fitting effect and generalization abili- ty;③ Compared with other intelligent algorithm,such as BP,RBF,SVM,GA-BP,the test set results (MSE,R2 ,SE) of improved GA-ELM model are much better and improve the prediction accuracy effectively;④ Using trained GA-ELM network to predict coal blasting form,the prediction error of control parameters a and β are not more than 5% and the prediction of blasting heap curve is close to the real blasting heap.

     

/

返回文章
返回