English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Inference of physical parameters from reference data is a well‐studied problem with many intricacies (inconsistent sets of data due to experimental systematic errors; approximate physical models…). The complexity is further increased when the inferred parameters are used to make predictions—virtual measurements—because parameter uncertainty has to be estimated in addition to parameters best value. The literature is rich in statistical models for the calibration/prediction problem, each having benefits and limitations. We review and evaluate standard and state‐of‐the‐art statistical models in a common Bayesian framework, and test them on synthetic and real datasets of temperature‐dependent viscosity for the calibration of the Lennard‐Jones parameters of a Chapman‐Enskog model. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers  AIChE J , 63: 4642–4665, 2017

A critical review of statistical calibration/prediction models handling data inconsistency and model inadequacy