Independent variables choice

Since 5 is a function of all the intermediate coordinates, a large scale optimization problem is to be expected. For illustration purposes consider a molecular system of 100 degrees of freedom. To account for 1000 time points we need to optimize 5 as a function of 100,000 independent variables ( ). As a result, the use of a large time step is not only a computational benefit but is also a necessity for the proposed approach. The use of a small time step to obtain a trajectory with accuracy comparable to that of Molecular Dynamics is not practical for systems with more than a few degrees of freedom. Fbr small time steps, ordinary solution of classical trajectories is the method of choice. 

Because V is related to T and P through an equation of state, V rather than P can serve as an independent variable. In this case the internal energy and entropy are the properties of choice whence... 

Interpolation of this type may be extremely unreliable toward the center of the region where the independent variable is widely spaced. If it is possible to select the values of x for which values of f(x) will be obtained, the maximum error can be minimized by the proper choices. In this particular case Chebyshev polynomials can be computed and interpolated [11]. 

Most often, we will choose the independent variables to be those quantities we control in the laboratory. The usual thermodynamic choices are (p and T) or (Vand T), Then, we measure changes in the thermodynamic properties of the system as these variables are altered. Thus, for a pure substance, writing... 

The error in variables method can be simplified to weighted least squares estimation if the independent variables are assumed to be known precisely or if they have a negligible error variance compared to those of the dependent variables. In practice however, the VLE behavior of the binary system dictates the choice of the pairs (T,x) or (T,P) as independent variables. In systems with a... 

It was shown in Chapter 1 that to carry out a design calculation the designer must specify values for a certain number of independent variables to define the problem completely, and that the ease of calculation will often depend on the judicious choice of these design variables. 

For this last stage, the one-at-a-time procedure may be a very poor choice. At Union Carbide, use of the one-at-a-time method increased the yield in one plant from 80 to 83% in 3 years. When one of the techniques, to be discussed later, was used in just 15 runs the yield was increased to 94%. To see why this might happen, consider a plug flow reactor where the only variables that can be manipulated are temperature and pressure. A possible response surface for this reactor is given in Figure 14-1. The response is the yield, which is also the objective function. It is plotted as a function of the two independent variables, temperature and pressure. The designer does not know the response surface. Often all he knows is the yield at point A. He wants to determine the optimum yield. The only way he usually has to obtain more information is to pick some combinations of temperature and pressure and then have a laboratory or pilot plant experimentally determine the yields at those conditions. 

According to Zeleznik and Gordon, tempers became so heated that a panel convened in 1959 to discuss equilibrium computation had to be split in two. Both sides seemed to have lost sight of the fact that the equilibrium constant is a mathematical expression of minimized free energy. As noted by Smith and Missen (1982), the working equations of Brinkley (1947) and White et al. (1958) are suspiciously similar. As well, the complexity of either type of formulation depends largely on the choice of components and independent variables, as described in Chapter 3. 

Fortunately, few of these variables are truly independent. Geochemists have developed a variety of numerical schemes to solve for equilibrium in multicomponent systems, each of which features a reduction in the number of independent variables carried through the calculation. The schemes are alike in that each solves sets of mass action and mass balance equations. They vary, however, in their choices of thermodynamic components and independent variables, and how effectively the number of independent variables has been reduced. 

The two equivalent, but different choices of independent variable, U or S, are distinguished as energy and entropy representations, respectively. 

Note the parentheses in the derivatives. There is no choice of the number of integration intervals it is supposedly adjusted to obtain a good precision. The output can be a graph or a table with 20 divisions of the independent variable. The scale of the ordinate is selected automatically to fit the range of the abscissa. 

The use of the electron density and the number of electrons as a set of independent variables, in contrast to the canonical set, namely, the external potential and the number of electrons, is based on a series of papers by Nalewajski [21,22]. A.C. realized that this choice is problematic because one cannot change the number of electrons while the electron density remains constant. After several attempts, he found that the energy per particle possesses the convexity properties that are required by the Legendre transformations. When the Legendre transform was performed on the energy per particle, the shape function immediately appeared as the conjugate variable to the external potential, so that the electron density was split into two pieces that can be varied independent the number of electrons and their distribution in space. 

The choice of electrical effect parameterization depends on the number of data points in the data set to be modeled. When using linear regression analysis the number of degrees of freedom, Ndf, is equal to the number of data points, Ndp, minus the number of independent variables, Ai,v, minus one. When modeling physicochemical data Ndf/Nj, should be at least 2 and preferably 3 or more. As the experimental error in the data increases, tVof/iViv should also increase. 

Even with the Kelen Tudos refinement there are statistical limitations inherent in the linearization method. The independent variable in any form of the linear equation is not really independent, while the dependent variable does not have a constant variance [O Driscoll and Reilly, 1987]. The most statistically sound method of analyzing composition data is the nonlinear method, which involves plotting the instantaneous copolymer composition versus comonomer feed composition for various feeds and then determining which theoretical plot best fits the data by trial-and-error selection of r and values. The pros and cons of the two methods have been discussed in detail, along with approaches for the best choice of feed compositions to maximize the accuracy of the r and r% values [Bataille and Bourassa, 1989 Habibi et al., 2003 Hautus et al., 1984 Kelen and Tudos, 1990 Leicht and Fuhrmann, 1983 Monett et al., 2002 Tudos and Kelen, 1981]. 

The only choices of independent variables allowed by the program come from the degree of freedom introduced by the reboiler, (9), and one of the degrees of freedom introduced by the condenser, (10). Again it should be emphasized that the variables set in these two instances must be independent. For example, if the column system consists of the single column of Table I and one sets the liquid bottom product from the reboiler, the vapor top product is no longer an independent variable and hence cannot be set under (10). Instead the reflux must be set as the last independent variable. 

By casting the governing equation in nondimensional form, important insights about relative scales and the contributions various terms can be revealed. One has choices in the establishment of reference scales on which the nondimensional. Generally, the objective is to select scales such that the nondimensional dependent and independent variables are order one. Thus the selection of reference scales requires some understanding of the class of problems for which nondimensionalization is sought. 

The choice of f(x) to label a function is entirely arbitrary in principle, any label will do We could just as easily have labelled it (x), G(x), 4>-, y or y Later on, we do use the label y to represent the eigenfunction of a given operator, but y is also routinely used to name the value of the dependent variable for some given function, and as a result it can be confusing sometimes to distinguish between the label applied to the function itself and the label applied to the value of the function for a particular choice of independent variable. 

To illustrate what is meant by scaling, let us return to the problem of the dissolving sphere and try to make sure that all the important dependent variables are in the interval [0, 1]. The independent variable, time, must be allowed to run its course. We have certainly done this with the radius of the sphere, for r can only diminish so, if the initial radius is R,x = r/R is obviously the correct choice. With an eye to extending the model later, we define U as the terminal velocity of a sphere of radius R, and because this decreases with decreasing radius, v = u/U is certainly in [0,1]. The very simple relationship v = x2 holds as long as our assumption of the validity of Stokes law is true. 

The primary objective of the discussion that follows is to establish a basis for choosing and applying carbon electrodes for analytical applications. As with any electrode material or electroanalytical technique, the choice depends on the application there is no ideal electrode for all situations. We first discuss the criteria that drive the chemist s choice of electrode or procedure. These criteria include background current, potential limits, and electrode kinetics, and may be considered dependent variables that are ultimately controlled by the properties of the carbon surface. Then we consider the independent variables that determine electroanalytical behavior. These include the choice of carbon material, surface roughness, cleanliness, etc. By considering the dependence of electroanalytical behavior on surface variables that the user can control, it should be possible to make rational choices of electrodes and procedures to lead to the desired analytical objective. 

The variables (or rather, intensive variables ), are p (pressure), T (temperature), and the concentrations (e.g., mole fractions of the components) in each separate phase. P is the number of phases present at equilibrium, and C is the minimum number of components necessary to duplicate any system that represents the equilibrium in question. (The components may sometimes be chosen in several ways). Finally, F is the number of degrees of freedom or the number of independent variables. With P phases present, one can (within limits) assign values independently of F variables, but then all other variables are fixed by the conditions for equilibrium. [For example, one may apply the phase rule to the system CaO—CCL—H20, with one, two, three, four, or five phases, determine how many independent variables result, and decide what will be the most practical choice of variables. (Five phases might be CaC03(s), Ca(OH)2(s), ice, an aqueous solution, and a gas phase.)]... 

In a part of this system which has been studied by Hemley (11), four phases can exist at equilibrium aqueous solution, solid quartz, solid kaolinite (Al1 Si2Or)(OH)4), and potassium mica (KAl tSi 4Oio(OH)2). The variables are p, T, and the various concentrations [K+], [IF], [CT], [Al]a(J, [Si(OH)4].i(, etc. If we apply the phase rule (Equation 1) to equilibria of the four phases mentioned, we find F = 5 -f 2 — 4 = 3. The most practical choice of independent variables would seem to be p, T, and [CT]. These are easy to control, and CT is the one ion that must remain in the aqueous phase since there is no place for it in the solid phases. The phase rule now states that after the values for these... 

Many choices of independent variables such as the energy, volume, temperature, or pressure (and others still to be defined) may be used. However, only a certain number may be independent. For example, the pressure, volume, temperature, and amount of substance are all variables of a single-phase system. However, there is one equation expressing the value of one of these variables in terms of the other three, and consequently only three of the four variables are independent. Such an equation is called a condition equation. The general case involves the Gibbs phase rule, which is discussed in Chapter 5. 

In this section we have now given all of the basic equations in chemical thermodynamics. Any other relation can be derived from one or more of these. We have also outlined the wide choice of independent variables that may be used. Fortunately, because of the limitation of being able to measure... 

The thermodynamic functions have been defined in terms of the energy and the entropy. These, in turn, have been defined in terms of differential quantities. The absolute values of these functions for systems in given states are not known.1 However, differences in the values of the thermodynamic functions between two states of a system can be determined. We therefore may choose a certain state of a system as a standard state and consider the differences of the thermodynamic functions between any state of a system and the chosen standard state of the system. The choice of the standard state is arbitrary, and any state, physically realizable or not, may be chosen. The nature of the thermodynamic problem, experience, and convention dictate the choice. For gases the choice of standard state, defined in Chapter 7, is simple because equations of state are available and because, for mixtures, gases are generally miscible with each other. The question is more difficult for liquids and solids because, in addition to the lack of a common equation of state, limited ranges of solubility exist in many systems. The independent variables to which values must be assigned to fix the values of all of the... 

These two laws can be combined for a system involving only pressure-volume work to obtain dU = TdS — PdV This so-called fundamental equation shows two things (1) thermodynamic properties of a system obey the rules of calculus and (2) the choice of independent variables (in this case S and V) plays a very important role in thermodynamics. The second law can be used to show that when S and V are held constant, the internal energy U of a system must decrease... 

---