Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ces

Cluster-based reduced-order descriptions of two phase flows

Naseem Ali a,⇑, Bianca Viggiano a, Murat Tutkun b, Raúl Bayoán Cal a
a
Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97207, USA
b
Institute for Energy Technology (IFE), Flow and Environmental Technology, 2007 Kjeller, Norway

h i g h l i g h t s

We present dynamical system representations based on low order description.

Cluster based on k-means algorithm is used to identify the slug and dispersed features.

Markov chain theory is used to identify the transition between the flow states.

Conducted global optimization analysis to present long-term behavior of the cluster transition matrix.

The compressive measurements are achieved through the optimized point measurements.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Dynamical system representations of two different multiphase flow regimes are extracted using a clus-
Received 6 November 2019 tering algorithm. Experiments were conducted in a flow loop using an X-ray tomography system to
Received in revised form 9 February 2020 obtain cross-sectional phase fraction fields of two distinct two-phase regimes: Dispersed flow and slug
Accepted 25 March 2020
flow. Low-order representations are used for classification of the dynamics and construction of the
Available online 4 April 2020
cluster-based model through Markov chain theory. The number of partitions required to describe the
flow provides insight into the flow nature and complexity, such as; the dispersed flow regime requires
Keywords:
a larger number of clusters to present the full dynamical cycle than the slug flow regime. The flow fea-
Slug flow
Dispersed flow
tures of each regime are obtained with the optimal number of clusters and the transition among these
Clustering clusters highlights the hidden dynamics of the probabilistic model. Compressive measurements are
Markov chain achieved through the optimized point measurements to compute the transition dynamics and perform
k-means the classification task.
Sensors Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tribute to the random behavior of multiphase flow, thus finding a

Turbulent multiphase flows, characterized by the simultaneous
existence of different phases, are common in many engineering
and environmental applications. Multiphase flow in a pipeline is
often classified into specified flow regimes such as slug flow, bub-
bly stratified flow, and dispersed flow to name a few (Brennen,
2005). Identifying the existence of flow patterns by the geometric
arrangement of the phases is essential in the characterization of
two-phase flow (Tengesdal et al., 1999; Zhong-Ke et al., 2013;
Wiedemann et al., 2019). The number of existing phases, flow rates
of the different phases, geometry, and fluid properties determine
the development of interaction between the phases and formation
of observable flow regimes. All aforementioned parameters con-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: naseem@pdx.edu (N. Ali), viggiano@pdx.edu (B. Viggiano),
murat.tutkun@ife.no (M. Tutkun), rcal@pdx.edu (R.B. Cal).
deterministic description is challenging, especially for the transi-
tion between phases due to its strong nonlinearity (Ayati and
Carneiro, 2018; Jaeger et al., 2018; Gao and Jin, 2012). Dispersed
flow occurs when particles, droplets or bubbles are distributed
across an interface into a carrying phase. The interaction between
phases in dispersed flow can be obtained from the fractional vol-
ume of the dispersed phase and mass loading. The turbulent carrier
flow has a major impact on the dynamics of the dispersed phase
when the fractional volume is small (Balachandar and Eaton,
2010). Further, the random distribution of the dispersed phase
increases the stochastic nature of the carrier phase. Slug flow,
one of the most complex multiphase flow regimes, is characterized
by perturbations at the interface that lead to ruptures by the
increased speed of the liquid portion. The volume fraction of the
phases is used to predict the occurrence of slug formation in the
flow by investigation of the flow features and patterns generated
by the elongated bubbles (Ayati and Vollestad, 2018).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2020.115660
0009-2509/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
Flow maps and transition from one flow regime to another are
often studied by flow pattern modeling, e.g. modeling the transi-
tion from stratified to annular flow or the transition from stratified
to stratified wavy flow (Wilkens, 1997). Nonlinear characteristics
dominate transitions between flow regimes, thus imposing diffi-
culty in pattern prediction methods which deem analytic solutions
and the superposition principle unappealing. The physically realis-
tic mechanism approaches, introduced in Taitel and Dukler (1976)
and Taitel et al. (1980), are the most commonly used methods in
flow pattern prediction. Linear stability theory has been employed
to develop these models, especially for prediction of the transition
from stratified to slug flow (Lin and Hanratty, 1986; Neogi et al.,
1994). However, the linear stability theory has high uncertainty
in prediction of the form of the fluid motion created from instabil-
ity (Mata et al., 2002).
In chemical, oil and gas industries, the determination of the
multiphase flow pattern is a challenging and valuable problem to
solve (Hernandez et al., 2019). In literature, two different
approaches are used to work on this problem including mechanis-
tic models and data-driven models. Mechanistic models rely on
theoretical equations that can predict both, the two-phase charac-
teristics and the flow pattern (Zhang et al., 2003; Hernandez et al.,
2019). However, this approach requires a set of closure relation-
ships such as gas-liquid interfacial friction, liquid entrainment,
mixture friction, and slug length. The determination of the correct
equations that describe these closure relationships is the main dis-
advantage of the mechanistic models. On the other hand, data-
based algorithms such as the machine learning approach can
achieve high predictive performance without requiring knowledge
about the full closure relationships (Al-Naser et al., 2016; Xie et al.,
2004; Amaya-Gómez et al., 2019; Cozin et al., 2016). However, the
data-based approach fails to describe the two-phase characteristics
such as pressure gradient, and holdup (Hernandez et al., 2019).
Hernandez et al. (2019) developed a data-driven methodology
named a decision tree-based model to correctly select the closure
relationships for two-phase flow pattern prediction. The model
combined the predictive performance of the data-driven models
with the mechanistic models to explain more characteristics of
the flow in pipes.
Developing a flow model from statistics based on the ensemble
of observations, that has the ability to represent a solution of a
dynamical system, can be used as alternative way to determinate
the multiphase flow pattern. In fluid dynamics, the model reduc-
tion has received attention in terms of flow structure analysis
and control (Kaiser et al., 2014). The model reduction basis
includes reducing the degrees of freedom and presenting a dynam-
ical model that links the evolution of the most dominant features
and the trajectories in the high-fidelity phase space. In certain
cases, the resulting reduced-order model poorly captures the tran-
sient states, even for systems that contain a large fraction of energy
through the projection (Holmes et al., 1998). The remedy for this
problem can be achieved by introducing a data-driven model. An
example based on this approach, the so-called cluster-based
reduced-order model (CROM), was introduced in fluid dynamics
by Kaiser et al. (2014). The CROM showed the ability to recover
physical mechanisms of complex dynamics, and used them for
flow control (Cao et al., 2014; Kaiser et al., 2018). Wei et al.
(2017) applied CROM to identify the wake stabilization mechanism
behind a twisted cylinder and captured the oscillatory behavior of
Kármán vortex shedding. This order reduction approach is based
on the k-means clustering and Perron-Frobenius operator (Kaiser
et al., 2014; Östh et al., 2015; Nair et al., 2019; Kaiser et al., 2019).
The current work aims to classify features of dispersed and slug
flow regimes with the intent of modeling the flow based on the
transition probability. The implications of a functioning model
for the multiphase community are substantial. Specifically for
industrial two-phase pipeline flow, where off-design conditions
create increased instabilities, can ultimately lead to slug develop-
ment from a typically stratified flow. The ramifications of unfavor-
able slug flow conditions are numerous, often resulting in
intermittent loading on pipe walls leading to fatigue of the infras-
tructure (Kvernvold et al., 1984). A cluster-based ROM is employed
for this purpose. This is accomplished through the characterization
of the kinematics of the flow regimes and identification of the
dynamics necessary to formulate a realistic probabilistic model.
The performance of the model is improved by training using a min-
imal set of optimized point sensors to present the low-dimensional
probabilistic dynamics in an appropriate coordinate system.
2. Theory
A review of aspects of the methodology of the reduced-order
model is here provided. The elements of the model are described
in three parts including the theory of proper orthogonal decompo-
sition, clustering algorithm and dynamical model of the transition.
2.1. Proper orthogonal decomposition
Proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) is the optimal Galerkin
expansion that minimizes the averaged residual of energy (Kaiser
et al., 2014). Further, the projection of the Navier-Stokes equation
onto the POD modes defines the evolution equation (Galerkin sys-
tem) (Cacuci et al., 2016). The POD provides a platform for data-
driven reduced-order modeling as a result of the minimization
problem. The optimality of the POD is achieved by choosing basis
functions that ensure the average error between the flow field
and its projection onto these functions is minimized (Holmes
et al., 1998),
*



2 +


ðH; /ÞX







min

H  /

; ð1Þ
jj/jj2
where ð; ÞX is the inner product in the domain X, and jj  jj is the
induced norm. In L2 space, the finite-dimensional representation
of the flow field using a set of deterministic basis functions, /, is
X
N
Hð^x; tÞ ¼ ai ðtÞ /i ð^xÞ; ð2Þ
i¼1
where i is an index, N is the total number of snapshots, and H is the
phase fraction of the flow fields as a function of spatial coordinates,
^x, and time, t. The basis functions, /i ð^xÞ, are the eigenfunctions
spanning the domain where the two-point correlation tensor is
computed. The random coefficients, ai ðt Þ, carry the time depen-
dence and are determined by back-projecting the POD modes (or
the eigenfunctions) onto the velocity field,
Z
ai ðt Þ ¼ Hð^x; t Þ/i ð^xÞd^x: ð3Þ
X
The POD is used to analyze experimental and numerical data, and
extract the dominant features and trends (Viggiano et al., 2018a;
Viggiano et al., 2018b; Ali et al., 2016). Also, the POD is employed
to provide relevant eigenfunctions and identify a low-dimensional
subspace for dynamical models. Here, it is implemented to encode
the flow dynamics through POD time coefficients, which are then
used as a basis for the clustering approach.
2.2. k-means Clustering
The main goal of the clustering algorithm is to construct a low-
order pattern space from a given data set that can be used to build
a model (Kaiser et al,. 2014; Bai et al., 2017). In clustering, a set of
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660 3

observations is arranged into subsets named clusters, where the ficients, aðtÞ. Therefore, the distance between two snapshots, S, is
observations within the same cluster have similar features. Obser- determined as:
vations can be classified based on the numeric values, text string,
Smn ¼ jjHm  Hn jjX ¼ jjam  an jj; ð10Þ
or colors. Two different paradigms can be used to learn from data:
supervised (labelled) and unsupervised (unlabelled) algorithms. As where m and n are indices. The initial cluster centroid position is
a result, the training label of experimental data is unknown and specified via a heuristic algorithm named k-means++ (Lloyd, 1982;
therefore the unsupervised learning algorithms must be used to Arthur and Vassilvitskii, 2007) to ensures that the distance between
achieve the clustering. An algorithm currently being used is the two arbitrary clusters is as far as possible. Therefore, the cost func-
k-means clustering algorithm, which provides basis functions for tion J introduced in Eq. (8) converges monotonically. The k-means++
a reduced-order model, as introduced in Burkardt et al. (2006). approach spreads out the K initial cluster centers as follow: after
Fig. 1 presents the k-means flowchart. The algorithm proceeds as assigning the number of clusters, the first cluster center is selected
follows: to connect each snapshot to the nearest cluster, a charac- uniformly. Thereafter, from the remaining data points, each subse-
teristic function is implemented as (Kaiser et al., 2014): quent cluster center is chosen based on a weighted probability dis-
 tribution that is proportional to the squared distance from the
1 if Hm 2 C j ;
Hm
j :¼ ð4Þ points closest, creating the cluster center. After choosing the initial
0 otherwise; centers, the process continues using standard k-means clustering.
where m is the index. The number of observations included in each The convergence criteria of the algorithm ensures that there is no
cluster nj is determined by, further variations in the partition and that the number of iterations
does not exceed a maximum limit. The main steps of the k-means++
X
N
clustering are presented in Algorithm 1.
nj :¼ Hm
j ; ð5Þ
m¼1
2.3. Dynamical model of cluster transition matrix
and the total number of snapshots, N, is determined from the total
number of observations nj in all clusters 1; . . . ; K as: In Hilbert space, where the notation of Euclidean space is gen-
eralized, the ensemble of measurements presents the attractors
X
K X
K X
N
N¼ nj ¼ Hm created from the transient process or post-transient stationary
k : ð6Þ
j¼1 k¼1 m¼1 state. Based on the probability distribution, the results of the clus-
tering can be used to generate a dynamical model that relies on the
Finally, the kinematic representation of the flow can be described cluster transition matrix and the Markov chain.
by the cluster centroids, defined as: The probability of falling within a cluster qj is approximately
1 X m 1X N equal to the number of snapshots included in each cluster normal-
Ck ¼ H ¼ Hm Hm : ð7Þ ized by the total number of snapshots (Kaiser et al., 2014; Ali et al.,
nj Hm 2C nj m¼1 j
k 2018),
The optimization is part of k-means algorithm, where it minimizes nj 1 X
N

the sum of squared errors between the cluster center and all points qj ¼ ¼ Hm : ð11Þ
N N m¼1 j
included in that cluster. Total cluster variance over all clusters is
defined as: Probability qj is always greater than zero (provided that N is finite),
and the summation of the probabilities is unity by definition. The
X
K X X
K X
N
J ðC 1 ;    ; C K Þ ¼ jjHm  C j jj2X ¼ Hm m 2
j jjH  C j jjX ; ð8Þ cluster probability vector including the probabilities
m
j¼1 H 2C i j¼1 m¼1 qj ¼ ½q1 ; . . . ; qK  pursues the temporal evolution of the dynamical
model. The cluster transition matrix (CTM) is defined as the proba-
and the optimal locations of the centroids are identified by the min-
bility, at a given forward time-step, of moving from one cluster to
imization algorithm defined as follows:
another. The elements of the cluster transition matrix can then be
C opt opt inferred by
1 ;    ; C K ¼ arg minC 1 ;;C K J ðC 1 ;    ; C K Þ: ð9Þ
njk
By considering the Galerkin expansion, shown in Eq. (2), to be exact, Pjk ¼ ; ð12Þ
nk
cluster analysis can be achieved with respect to the POD time coef-

Fig. 1. The k-means flowchart.

4 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
where P jk is the probability of transition from cluster k to j. The
transition presents the cardinality (number of elements of the set)
of maximum likelihood estimator. The number of instances (snap-
shots) that move from cluster k to j is denoted by njk , and it can
be determined as:
X
N1
njk ¼ Hm
k Hj
mþ1
: ð13Þ
m¼1
The cluster transition matrix is non-negative P jk P 0, for
j; k ¼ 1; . . . ; K, and the summation of each column is unity
PK
j¼1 P jk ¼ 1, corresponding to the total probability for all transi-
tions. After all possible transitions are stored, an unbiased transition
matrix is acquired after normalization condition. Moreover, diago-
nal elements present the probability to remain within the same
cluster at a given time step. The cluster transition is related to the
Markov chain characterized by the Markov property. The centroids
present a discrete number of states of the Markov chain. In partic-
ular, the transition probability distribution for future states of the
stochastic process depends only upon the current state, not on
the preceding sequence of transition (Norris, 1998; Kaiser et al.,
2014). Fig. 2 shows an example for a three-state Markov process.
The conditional probability of the evolution is defined as
Pjk ¼ PrðC Lþ1 ¼ jjC L ¼ kÞ;
where Pr is the probability, C L ¼ k represents a cluster of index k
that is visited at time LDt. The Pr ðC Lþ1 ¼ jjC L ¼ kÞ can be explained
as the conditional probability of next value of random variable of
C Lþ1 ¼ j that depends on the C L ¼ k.
The cluster-based model is data-driven, in that it is built based
on statistical closure dynamics. It is suitable for transient phe-
nomenology and ensemble control, and is robust for long-term
statistics. Sufficiently, the CROM has the ability to expose the fea-
tures of the attractors from the data and reveal the dynamical con-
nection between flow events. For example, the CROM can
efficiently manage periodic flow by discretizing the periodic cycles
into phase bins instead of presenting the model based on cosine-
sine wave pairs. The Markov model can describe the unsteady non-
linear Navier–Stokes equation through linear evolution equation
(Kaiser et al., 2014).
3. Experimental setup
Experiments were performed in the Well Flow Loop of the Insti-
tute for Energy Technology (IFE) in Kjeller, Norway. The test sec-
tion is constructed of transparent PVC, with a total length of up
to 50 m and an inner diameter of 10 cm. Gamma densitometers
are placed along the length of the pipe to monitor and record
Fig. 2. A diagram representing a three-state Markov process, with the states labelled C 1 ; C 2 and C 3 . The C k and Lm are the centroids and the label of the data, respectively. The
probability of the Markov process changing from one state to other states, with the direction indicated by the arrow.
holdup variations in the streamwise direction. For more detailed
measurements, an X-ray computed tomography (CT) system is
used to measure profiles corresponding to holdup values as a func-
tion of spatial position in the cross-section of the pipe through
time. Pressure transducer and densitometer measurements are
averaged over a sampling time of 15 s. Enhanced mixing of the
phases is produced by a static mixer operating directly after the
injection site of the two fluids into the pipe. The test section is hor-
izontally aligned at 00:1 . For further details on the Well Flow
Loop geometry as well as the X-ray system, cf. Hu et al. (2005,
2014).
The X-ray computed tomography (CT) system used in the cur-
rent experiments is comprised of six point sources and six detec-
tors, with a sampling frequency of 50 Hz. The recording time is
25 s. The system consists of two triangular setups, each containing
three cameras and three sources at adjustable positions along the
pipe. Each X-ray is attenuated as it passes through the air, the pipe
wall and the fluids inside the pipe, with stronger attenuation indi-
cated by the lower intensity of the camera pixel. Calibration
images are obtained by filling the pipe entirely with gas, oil or
water in a sequence depending on the number of phases that are
tested during the measurement campaign. This allows for the pixel
value to be converted to a phase content percentage value, referred
to as the phase fraction, for the calibrated phases. Two-
ð14Þ dimensional tomograms are constructed from the profiles of
holdup measured by X-ray detectors. The dimension of a single
pixel is 0.1 mm  0.1 mm. For noise reduction, groups of neighbor-
ing pixels are averaged and the final resolution is therefore 2 mm/
pixel.
Two experiments with two-phase flow are analyzed to compare
characteristics of the two regimes commonly found in engineering
applications. The dispersed flow, comprised of oil and water, and
slug flow, comprised of gas and oil, contain 1250 snapshots in total.
The sum of the velocities of the two phases is the mixed velocity,
U mix , obtained from the inlet pump velocity of each fluid and equal
to 1 m/s and 1.5 m/s for the dispersed and slug flow, respectively.
Fig. 3 displays the design of the experimental setup. Further details
regarding the X-ray tomography system setup, uncertainties and
basic statistics of the flow fields can be found in Viggiano et al.
(2018a, 2019).
4. Result
4.1. Proper orthogonal decomposition and spectral analysis
Fig. 4 presents the cumulative energy fraction and normalized
energy of the POD eigenvectors, displaying the low-rank repre-
sentations that contain the energetic features in the flow. The
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660 5

Fig. 3. A representative diagram of the experimental setup (Viggiano et al., 2018a).

Fig. 4. Energy content of the POD modes for dispersed flow and slug flow presented as the (a) normalized energy and (b) cumulative energy.

P
normalized energy is computed as Ek ¼ rk = Nk¼1 rk , where rk are
the eigenvalues of singular value decomposition result. The
cumulative energy fraction Bk of each mode can be represented
P P
as Bk ¼ kj¼1 rj = Nn¼1 rn . The comparison between the slug and
dispersed flow regimes reveals that the first modes of the slug
flow contain the largest singular values. Indicating that slug flow
reconstructs the flow dynamics faster than the dispersed flow. In
both cases, there is a significant variance captured in the first
POD modes. That said the data is highly correlated and the dis-
persed and slug formation have significant overlap in their flow
events.
Fig. 5 shows the continuous eigenvalues of the most dominant
features (x) that are determined as x ¼ logðgd Þ=Dt. gd represents
the eigenvalues of best fit operator determined from the pseudo-
inverse of / that is projected on the POD modes. Eigenvalues of
the dominant features are visualized in the complex plane. The real
part constitutes the growth rate and the imaginary part, the fre-
quency. The dispersed flow regime displays invariant distribution
at gd ¼ 1, and three non-oscillatory modes that fall in the same line
with the invariant distribution. There exist two oscillatory modes.
The smallest damping is found at ImgðxÞ ¼ 0:6. The slug flow
regime display four invariant distributions and three oscillatory
modes. The smallest damping is found at ImgðxÞ ¼ 0:05.

Fig. 5. The continuous eigenvalues specification of the most dominant features of (a) dispersed flow and (b) slug flow. Re(x) and Img(x) present the real and imaginary
component, respectively.
6 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
4.2. Number of clusters
The CROM algorithm is implemented on the POD random coef-
ficients, ai ðtÞ, presented in Eq. (3). Again this is executed by parti-
tioning the data into groups, with the objective of minimizing the
distances between the data points inside a cluster and maximizing
the distances between the clusters. Although the number of snap-
shots and the dimension of the flow systems are known, the num-
ber of partitions is unknown (Brunton and Kutz, 2019). The
identification of the optimal number of clusters is the first step
of the k-means procedure, and must be determined. The main tran-
sition mechanism of the Markov model becomes apparent after
identifying the optimal number of clusters. The classification of
the clusters is obtained via optimization of silhouette scoring for
each flow regime, which highlights the separation distance
between the clusters on a range of [1,1], where a high value
implies that the observation is properly matched to its cluster
and poorly matched to adjacent clusters (Rousseeuw, 1987).
Hence, silhouette coefficients near +1 signify that the observation
is remote from the neighboring clusters. A value of 0 indicates that
the observation is on or very close to the decision boundary
between two neighboring clusters. The negative values indicate
that observation is assigned to the wrong cluster. Algorithm 3 pre-
sents the main steps of determining the silhouette index
(Niennattrakul and Ratanamahatana, 2009). Fig. 6 displays the sil-
houette representation for each flow regime for the chosen cluster-
ing scheme. By investigating a range of clustering options, the
following features are observed: Due to the more complex inter-
face, dispersed flow requires seven clusters. On the other hand,
slug flow exhibits a common behavior that requires four clusters
to accurately describe flow dynamics. After assigning the number
of clusters, the representative trajectories of each cluster are iden-
tified. The same conclusion regarding the optimal number is also
obtained using the elbow criterion and agglomerative hierarchical
clustering algorithm.
4.3. Cluster assignments
The objective of the k-means algorithm is that each observation
is labeled as relating to a group with the nearest mean. The assign-
ments of the clusters for each case are shown in Fig. 7. Here, the
assignment of the clusters presents a distinct signature of distribu-
tion and the footprint of the flow regimes. The transition in the dis-
persed regimes is described by the rapid changing in the transition
Fig. 6. Silhouette diagram obtained through hierarchical clustering algorithm applied on the time coefficient trajectories of (a) dispersed flow, and (b) slug flow.
from one cluster to another. The dynamical regimes are most often
connected by cluster C 3 and C 4 , where the flow has to pass through
these clusters to move from one dynamical scenario to the other.
The main connections to these clusters are semi-periodic, as seen
at t 2 ½200  400.
For slug flow, the cluster C 1 is the basis for the transition to the
other clusters. The periodic nature of the clusters shown in Fig. 7 is
consistent with time profiles for the cross-sectional oil holdup pre-
sented in Viggiano et al. (2018a). This behavior is relevant to the
alternating passage of gas and liquid. The transition from cluster
to cluster indicates a disturbance at the liquid surface by the bub-
bles through the entrainment process. Further, the slug exhibits a
periodic behavior in a certain range of the clusters, where it
appears through the transition from C 1 to C 4 .
4.4. Cluster-based Markov model
A Markov chain model is represented using the probabilities of
transition matrix. The changes in the state of the clusters are called
transitions. The probabilities associated with various cluster
changes are named transition probabilities. Additionally, the tran-
sition matrix is a stochastic matrix, whose entries in each row must
add up to exactly unity. The transitions among different flow fea-
tures, which are very sensitive to the number of clusters, allow
quantitative characterization of the dynamic flow behavior under-
lying different two phase flow patterns.
Fig. 8 presents the cluster centroids and transitions, based on
the CTM, for the dispersed flow regime. The centroids, shown by
the 2D contour figures, represent the kinematic description of
the derived dynamical model, similar to POD modes. Thus, these
centroids are the states of the derived Markov chain model and
they are computed as the mean phase fraction across tomograms
in each cluster, as seen in Eq. 7. In each contour presented in
Fig. 8, there exists a kinematic feature or set of features horizon-
tally spanning the pipe cross-section corresponding to the inter-
face where stratification is observed. This is represented by a
single structure or three upright structures, as observed in cluster
C 4 . In the top of the pipe, there exists a single structure or a triple
circular structure that represents the dispersion of the water into
the oil phase.
The cluster transition depicts the dynamical behavior and geo-
metric relation of the centroids, where the arrows designate the
possible transitions. The cluster transition matrix is presented as
a Markov chain that highlights the evolving trajectories in time
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
Fig. 7. Cluster assignment of each snapshot to a cluster of (a) Dispersed flow and (b) slug flow.
based on the probability distribution that is bounded with a unity
of summation. The evolution of the state variables is described
through the cluster transition matrix, which is the basis for the
dynamical system model (Kaiser et al., 2014). The CPU time spent
in the implementation of this cluster-based ROM is 17.19 s running
on a 3.5 GHz Intel Core i7 processor and a 32 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
memory.
The dynamics of the Markov model, which are visualized
through the interactions between the centroids, demonstrate the
features of the transition between the flow states. Four natural
subsets are observed. The first, second, third and fourth groups
include, respectively, clusters C 6 ; C 7 ; C 3 , clusters C 1 ; C 5 , clusters
C 2 ; C 4 ; C 3 ; C 7 and clusters C 1 ; C 2 ; C 4 . These subsets display increased
internal transitions when compared with transitions to another
group. Presenting the coherent structures that drive the transitions
and the temporal connection aids in understanding the flow
behavior. The temporal phase evolution of the flow is combined
with the path of the transition in Fig. 8 for clarity. For example,
the flow reaches cluster C 5 only from cluster C 1 , indicating that
the flow can achieve the long stable feature at the center of the
pipe only through cluster C 1 . The triple circular structure in cluster
C 2 results in a flow transition between C 1 ; C 4 and C 7 . The circular
structure detaches from the center to the top of the pipe as shown
in the transition path between C 6 and C 4 . There is a flow from the
crossing point of C 3 and C 4 toward C 2 and C 7 , respectively. It is also
noted that the classification of the clusters displays different types
of states. By way of illustration, cluster subgroup {C 1 ; C 4 ; C 2 } is a
communicating state, where exchange occurs between C 1 and
C 2 ; C 1 $ C 4 . The communication is also observed between
C 4 $ C 2 , and C 1 $ C 2 . The same classification state is shown in
the clusters {C 3 ; C 6 }, and clusters {C 6 ; C 7 }. All clusters can be
reached from others, meaning that no cluster is considered in a
class of its own. Further, there is a recurrent state through the
7
Markov chain, where there is the possibility of moving to and from
any cluster. According to their periods, the clusters also can be
classified, where clusters {C 6 ; C 7 ; C 3 }, {C 4 ; C 1 ; C 2 }, and {C 1 ; C 5 } are
aperiodic states.
Fig. 9 describes the kinematics and dynamics of the slug flow
regime. The flow is characterized by the cyclical development
and deployment of the liquid slug through time. The development
of the gas bubble is shown in the clusters as a horizontal centerline
of the pipe with slow development. The flow across the pipe is sep-
arated with a pronounced interface, where the liquid slug is iden-
tified. The flat, horizontally-oriented structures represent the oil
levels moving from near centerline to the top of the pipe. More pre-
cisely, the clusters convey the liquid slug bridging the pipe, the
stratified flow within the film at the interface region, and the slug
formation. Transition states of the slug flow reveal the grouping
that connects the flow events. The four clusters create a closed loop
of the transition. Also, clusters {C 1 ; C 4 } are classified as a communi-
cating state, where C 1 $ C 4 . The same state is observed between
C 1 $ C 2 , and C 3 $ C 4 , indicating that, there is also a interaction
for C 1 $ C 3 , and C 4 $ C 2 . Here, the four clusters are considered
as a closed loop in one direction (anti-clockwise), where the state
C 3 can not be reached from the cluster C 2 . There is a walk path
between the C 2 !C 4 ; C 3 !C 2 , and C 3 !C 1 . Based on Markov
chain classification, there is no transient state, where the stochastic
process contains all recurrent states. For example, state 2 can be
reached through states 3, 4 and 1. The chain also ensures that a
process starting in a recurrent state will return to the same state.
The Markov chain model shows that the trajectories of slug flow
are basically composed of one big loop of the fourth clusters and
two small loops of clusters. The orbit represents intermittent
quasi-periodic oscillation behavior. As a result of the intermittent
quasi-periodic oscillation manner correlated with unstable peri-
odic orbits between gas and liquid fractions of slug flow, the tran-
8 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
Fig. 8. The cluster transition and centroids of dispersed regime. The arrows indicate possible transitions among clusters. The contour plots present the centroids of the
clusters.
sition probability in a Markov model of slug flow is relatively sim-
ple compared with that of dispersed flow. The data-driven
approach shows that slug flow is controlled by a small number of
degrees of freedom. The clustering approach successfully identifies
the flow patterns, and therefore can be used as a flow regime clas-
sifier in multiphase flow.
4.5. Probability evolution of the clusters
Based on the probability distribution, a dynamical model can be
generated from the cluster transition matrix and the Markov chain.
In each cluster, the probability q is approximately equal to the
number of snapshots included in the cluster normalized by the
total number of snapshots, see Eq. (11). To identify the cluster
probability, the non-negative temporal probability vector, pL , at
time instance L with a normalization condition is grouped as
(Kaiser et al., 2014; Östh et al., 2015):
 T X
K
pL ¼ pL1 ; . . . ; pLK ; & pLj ¼ 1:
j¼1
The aspects of the probability vector hold for each time step. With
iteration approach, the consecutive distributions that define the
evolution of the cluster probability vector can be determined as
pLþ1 ¼ PpL ; L ¼ 0; 1; 2; . . . ;
where P is the stochastic matrix (one-step transition matrix) that
displays the properties of a time-homogeneous Markov chain
(Meyer, 2000). The initial probability distribution is assigned as p0
and the consecutive distributions based on iteration steps as the
infinite-term CTM is defined in compact way as
pL ¼ P L p0 : ð17Þ
Here, PL ¼ P Ljk and presents the transition probability to move from
cluster k to cluster j in time step L. Also, for L ¼ 0, the one-step tran-
sition matrix becomes identity matrix, P0 ¼ I. Asymptotically, the
long-term behavior of probability distribution can be determined as
p1 ¼ lim PL p0 : ð18Þ
L!1
When PL converges to the stationary matrix P1 , the system
becomes probabilistically reproducible. In other words, the system
is ergodic. The stationary probability vector is identical to the eigen-
vector associated with the largest eigenvalue (Kaiser et al., 2014).
ð15Þ
Also, the rate of convergence is proportional to the second largest
eigenvalue of the CTM.
Fig. 10 shows the results of cluster probability from the data q
(orange), the asymptotic probability distribution p1 (gray) and
the eigenvectors (black). The results illustrate that there exists a
significant consistency between the probability distribution
ð16Þ
directly obtained from the data and those obtained from the
asymptotic distribution for both regimes signifying that the two
systems are reproducible.
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
CTM
1
4
3
4
Fig. 9. The cluster transition and centroids of slug flow regime. The contour plots present the centroids of the clusters.
4.6. Voronoi maps
A Voronoi diagram mathematically presents partitioning of a
two dimensional plane into regions based on distance to objects
in a particular subset of the plane. Also, Voronoi algorithm subdi-
vide the space into number of cells (clusters), where each observa-
tion belongs to only one cell. Here, the Voronoi diagram is used as a
verification for the k-means clustering results. Fig. 11 shows the
visualization of the Voronoi diagram based on the amplitudes of
the first two POD coefficients. The black lines present the borders
of Voronoi cells, and the data points with the similar color belong
to the same cluster. The large black markers are the centroids of
the cluster. The distribution of the POD coefficients is the dynamic
attractor which aids in the design of flow control schemes.
Viggiano et al. (2019) showed that Voronoi diagram is very useful
describing the critical points as a function of cross-sectional loca-
tion of two-phase slug flow. The two regimes convey different par-
titions, where the complexity of each regime is identified through
the classification. The well-defined optimal number of the partition
is observed, where each color is specified in subset in the diagram.
This trend is shown at the dispersed and slug cases. Voronoi Maps
are an alternative approach to define the flow pattern map, where
the probability area indicates the transition from pattern to
another.
4.7. Sparse sensor identification
Determining the optimal sensor location plays a vital role in the
classification, detection, reconstruction of the high-dimensional
nonlinear systems as well as future prediction (Manohar et al.,
9
C2 C3
1
0.5
0.05
0.005
0.0005
C1 C4
0
2018). In a different perspective, reducing the number of sensors
is necessary to minimize costs and computational constraints.
Compressed sensing can take two paradigms. First, collecting high
dimensional data and then compressing the data dimension. For
example, Vahabi and Selviah (2018) investigated the application
of principle component analysis to reduce the dimensionality of
multiphase flow acoustic data. They aimed to form a smaller data
set that preserves the pattern of the original data set. The second
paradigm relies on collecting of few random measurements and
then deducting the sparse description that provides the trans-
formed basis to reconstruct the full dynamics. The second style is
more robust as a result of missing information in the first paradigm
(Brunton and Kutz, 2019).
Sparse optimization is a promising perspective to avoid the ill-
condition of overfitting, without loss of interpretation of the
dynamics, while adding robustness to the missing data case. The
optimization for classification is applied after dimensionality
reduction to find the optimal sparse sensor locations. Using dis-
tinct clusters, the state space is discretized and classified into a
low-rank feature. The methodology used here is an extension of
the CROM framework with the sparse sensor placement optimiza-
tion for classification (SSPOC) architecture introduced in Brunton
et al. (2016) and Kaiser et al. (2018). The combination includes
the compressive measurements to compute the previously pre-
sented probabilistic transition dynamics, followed by the applica-
tion of the algorithm to find optimized point measurement
locations to perform the high accuracy classification task.
In the SSPOC, low-rank representations of POD are combined
with linear discriminant analysis (LDA) to obtain low-
dimensional classifiers that maximize the between-class variance
10 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660

Fig. 10. The cluster probability distributions from the data q ( ), from the converged iteration of the transition dynamics as predicted by the model ( ) and the eigenvector
associated with the dominant eigenvalue ( ) for (a) dispersed flow, and (b) slug flow.

Fig. 11. The visualization of the Voronoi diagram of the clusters for (a) dispersed flow and (b) slug flow. Lines correspond to the borders of the Voronoi cells, color coded dots
represent the points of the time series data where the color depicts the cluster. Note that black dots are indication of the center of the cluster.

and minimize within-class variance (Fisher, 1936; Rao, 1948; where C represents the eigenvalues. The eigenvectors associated
Bishop, 2006; Brunton et al., 2016). For a multi-class LDA, a projec- with the maximum eigenvalues define the projection bases.
tion W can be constructed as Thereafter, SSPOC obtains a sparse matrix that reconstructs the
discriminating directions using an optimization algorithm as (Kai-
W 0T AB W 0
W ¼ arg maxW 0 ; ð19Þ ser et al., 2018),
W 0T AW W 0

where W is the discriminating direction, AW is the within-class scat- s ¼ arg mins0 jjs0 jj1 þ kjjs0 1jj subject to jj/T s0  WjjF 6 e ð23Þ
ter matrix and AB is the between-class scatter matrix. These matri-
ces are defined, respectively, as where s is the sparse matrix, k is the coupling weight, 1 is a unity
column vector, F denotes the Frobenius norm, and e is the error tol-
X
K X
  T erance. The CVX convex optimization package (Grant et al., 2008) is
AW ¼ ai  lj ai  lj ; ð20Þ
used to achieve solutions to the optimization equation, see Algo-
j¼1 i2C j
rithm 5. This is a l1 -minimization that optimizes the measurement
matrix under a condition that the rows of measurement matrix are
X
K
  T
AB ¼ N j lj  l lj  l : ð21Þ uncorrelated with the columns of one of the sparsifying basis. In
j¼1 other words, there is a small inner product between them.
The spatial sensor locations are depicted in the sparse matrix.
lj is the mean of the class j; l is the mean of all observations, and Nj These sensors select rows in / which provide an optimal recon-
is the observations included in class j. Fig. 12 presents a schematic struction of W. The sensing matrix is built from non-zero rows in
of the linear discriminant analysis that defines the projection W T s and is used to achieve the new classification on low-
from the measurements, where the classifications occur to split dimensional measurements. A new classifier is trained in the sen-
the two categories. Algorithm 4 present the main step of the LDA sor space via new discriminating directions. Two paths are used to
(Brunton et al., 2016). The projection W can be determined from find an optimal set of sensors which include; varying k and check-
the generalized eigenvalue problem as ing the accuracy or varying the number of features with a fixed
AB W ¼ CAw W; ð22Þ value of k (Kaiser et al., 2018). The SSPOC is linked with CROM to
obtain optimized point measurements and to find the optimal
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660 11

Fig. 12. A schematic of the linear discriminant analysis (LDA). The direction W optimally separates the data clusters. The value of g determines the classification of the data
whether they belong to C 1 or C 2 . The decision space can be determined from the inner product of POD coefficients and discriminant vector (Bai et al., 2017).

Fig. 13. A schematic diagram of the sparse sensor optimization including the cluster-based reduced-order model procedure and classification procedure (Kaiser et al., 2018).
(a) Training stage for sensors, (b) training step for classification, and (c) test step. The color dots present the random sensor locations.

sensor locations for dynamical systems (Kaiser et al., 2018). Fig. 13
shows a schematic of the sparse sensor optimization steps includ-
ing the cluster-based reduced-order model procedure and classifi-
cation procedure. Compressed sensing is used to identify the
transition probability matrix from a subset of measurement data.
The k-means clustering is linked to the SSPOC algorithm to learn
the sensors. Discrimination vectors of LDA are integrated with
the cluster centroids to learn locations for a group of optimized
sensors. From these sensors, the measurements are collected and
classified into a cluster. This step is known as an online phase.
Through the training step shown in Fig. 13(a), the cluster algorithm
is performed to obtain the centroids and associated label Lm that
are subsequently fed into the LDA algorithm to find the most infor-
mative location. The classifier is updated in the sparse sensor
domain as shown in Fig. 13(b), where the cluster centroids and dis-
crimination vectors are re-trained on the measurements. The new
vectors and centroids are marked by W c , and C^k , respectively.
Fig. 13(b) presents the test step, where the measurements are col-
lected from the sensors and classified into clusters. The perfor-
mance of the learned sensors is compared with the full state
system. Pseudo code for optimized point sensor is presented in
Algorithm 6 (Kaiser et al., 2018).
4.8. Accuracy of reconstruction
Fig. 14 quantifies the accuracy of the resulting centroid alloca-
tion from the SSPOC sensor selection based on varying N f and k
inputs. The accuracy is tested in the sensor space by the nearest-
centroid approach which is applied to the cluster centroids and
subspace spanned by the LDA discriminating directions. Testing
the impact of the number of modes N f is achieved at a range
12 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660

Fig. 14. Accuracy of reconstruction for (a) dispersed flow, and (b) slug flow.

Fig. 15. Cluster assignment of each snapshot from sparse sensors for slug flow. (a) N f ¼ 1, (b) N f ¼ 2, and (c) N f ¼ 5.
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660 13

Fig. 16. Number of sensor used in the reconstruction for (a) dispersed flow, and (b) slug flow.

Fig. 17. The location of the sparse sensors used for the reconstruction based on different numbers of features at k ¼ 10: (a)-(e) dispersed flow, and (e)-(j) slug flow. The
background contours present the time average of the phase fraction.

of coupling hyperparameters including k 2 ½0:1; 0:5; 1; 10;
102 ; 103 ; 104 . The accuracy increases with increasing the number
of features N f included for a fixed k. The variation of hyperparam-
eter k non-systematically changes the reconstruction accuracy for
a fixed N f although overall higher accuracy with less number of
modes is shown in the slug flow. For example, the accuracy of
reconstruction with N f =1 and k ¼ 10 is 0.65, whereas the corre-
sponding accuracy for the dispersed flow is 0.5. This is due to the
complexity signature of the flow regimes. The reconstruction of
the cluster assignment is shown in Fig. 15.
Another important concern for controls is the trade-off between
the accuracy of the model and the costs of the sensors (e.g. the num-
ber of sensors used to build up the model). Fig. 16 presents the num-
ber of sensors as a function of the number of features and coupling
parameter shown in Fig. 14. The number of sensors increases with
increasing the number of features included in the reconstruction.
The number of sensors is more sensitive to the number of features
than the coupling parameter. However, the coupling parameter
has more impact on the reconstruction when N f is large.
4.9. Optimal locations of sensors
In particular, sensor locations are optimized to reconstruct
high-dimensional states from point measurements. Fig. 17 pre-
sents the optimal locations of the sensors that give high accuracy
in the centroid assignment for the dispersed and slug flow regimes.
Observing these locations in the low-rank representation can high-
light the locations in the pipe most sensitive to major variations in
the flow. As shown in the figure, the interface region between the
water and oil in the dispersed flow regime carries the most coher-
ent features and indicates the optimal sensor locations. For the slug
flow, the optimal locations with low-order descriptions are dis-
tributed also at the interface region along with the hold up of the
slug. A more accurate reconstruction is possible by increasing the
number of the sensors across the pipe cross-section. However,
the relation between number of sensors and accuracy improve-
ment is not linear. Depending on the flow cases, 5% and 10% accu-
racy improvements for slug and dispersed flows respectively, have
been observed when the number of sensors is increased
14 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
tremendously. An optimum reconstruction preserving the pattern
of original data and the probabilities of the full-state CTM can be
achieved using 1% of the total data. The current result can be auto-
mated for the oil and gas industry application through the possibil-
ity of incorporating ultrasonic measurements as new inputs for the
Markov model to identify the flow pattern and determine the opti-
mal place for measurements.
5. Conclusion
Analysis of the phase fraction of slug and dispersed flow
regimes using the k-means clustering algorithm reveals important
flow structures that provide the basis for the transition mecha-
nisms within these regimes. Cluster-based reduced-order model-
ing is applied to determine the quasi-attractors of the system,
and periodical behavior of the associated phase fraction of the flow
regimes. Time coefficients of the proper orthogonal decomposition
are grouped according to the clustering technique and classified
via Markov chain theory which aids in describing the evolution
of the probability distribution of the trajectories. The cluster anal-
ysis decomposes the data based on the similarity of snapshots and
compresses them into a low number of representative states.
The cluster assignment shows the coarse nature of the dis-
persed flow and the fine geometry of the slug flow. The complex
nature of the dispersed flow is delivered through the optimal num-
ber of partitions, where it requires a large number of clusters to
obtain the full dynamical system. The centroids of the clusters
highlight the coherent structures of each flow regime, and the Mar-
kov chain model shows the connection among these structures. A
benefit, which can be realized using the current approach as dis-
cussed in the paper, is to combine this with a tracking model, espe-
cially for the transient slug, where the transition from one cluster
to another can reveal the nature of the process utilizing the prob-
Algorithm 1. k-means++
ability of the Markov model. Thus, the subsequent step of the cur-
rent analysis is to model the dynamics of the coherent structures
and their impact on the response of the mean flow, and in turn
highlight the accurate and timely measurements that play as opti-
mal keys for flow control.
The cluster-based approach is used to identify a sufficient and
small number of optimal measurements that preserve the proba-
bilistic dynamics of the full high-dimensional data set. The exis-
tence of coherent features in the dispersed and slug flow regimes
facilities the sparse representation and drives the high-
dimensional system to evolve on low dimensional manifolds.
Implying that the sparse representations are appropriate to dis-
cover the dynamics of the flow regimes in a well-chosen basis
coordinate system and provide faster state estimation for a high
response time control system. Learning quickly from few measure-
ments is an essential task, which may be regarded in the perspec-
tive of the design of experiments; particularly, collecting the most
informative measurements to train a predictive model.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Naseem Ali: Methodology, writing & analysing. Bianca
Viggiano: Methodology, writing & analysing. Murat Tutkun:
Methodology, writing - review & editing. Raúl Bayoán Cal:
Methodology, writing - review & editing.
Appendix A. Algorithms
Here, the main algorithms used through the manuscript are
presented as pseudo-code forms. The algorithms include the k-
means++, silhouette index, Linear Discriminant Analysis, minimiza-
tion, cluster transition matrix, and sensor place optimizations.
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660 15

Algorithm 2. Cluster Transition Matrix

Algorithm 3. Silhouette Index Algorithm

16 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660

Algorithm 4. Linear Discriminant Analysis

Algorithm 5. Minimization algorithm 17 [Wn] = LDA (Select-M, C-new, Lnew )

18 Decision-Line = C-new  Wn
Result: Minimize Eq. (23) 1. CVX-Begin 19 Data-Decision = Select-M  Wn
2. variable (s) 20 [L-test] = min (dist(U(Test), C-new)
3. minimize(norm(s(:), 1) + k norm(s unit, 1)) subject to: 21 [L-test2] = min (dist(Data-Decision, Decision-Line))
4. norm(/0 s - W) <¼  22 Accuracy = (L-test(L-test==Lm )jj L-test2(L-test2==Lm )
5. CVX-End

References
Algorithm 6. Sparse Sensor Optimization
Ali, N., Kadum, H.F., Cal, R.B., 2016. Focused-based multifractal analysis of the wake
in a wind turbine array utilizing proper orthogonal decomposition. J. Renew.
Result: Determine Optimized Point Sensor Sustain. Energy 8 (6), 063306.
1 Input: H; K Ali, N., Calaf, M., Cal, R.B., 2018. Reduced-order modeling of the wake behind a
2 [U, S, V] = SVD(H) single wind turbine. In: iTi Conference on Turbulence. Springer, pp. 285–290.
Al-Naser, M., Elshafei, M., Al-Sarkhi, A., 2016. Artificial neural network application
3 ai = U  H for multiphase flow patterns detection: a new approach. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 145,
4 ½P; Lm ; C k  = CTM (k-mean (ai ; KÞ) 548–564.
Amaya-Gómez, R., López, J., Pineda, H., Urbano-Caguasango, D., Pinilla, J., Ratkovich,
5 [Train, Test] = Classify(M) .Split data into training and test
N., Muñoz, F., 2019. Probabilistic approach of a flow pattern map for horizontal,
set vertical, and inclined pipes. Oil & Gas Sci. Technol.–Revue dIFP Energies
6 [Ut, St, Vt] = SVD(HðTrainÞ) nouvelles 74, 67.
Arthur, D., Vassilvitskii, S., 2007. k-means++: The advantages of careful seeding. In:
7 ainew = Ut  HðTrainÞ
h i Proceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete
8 Lnew ; C^ = k-mean (ai )
k new
algorithms. SIAM, pp. 1027–1035.
Ayati, A.A., Carneiro, J.N.E., 2018. Statistical characterization of interfacial waves in
9 [W] = LDA(ainew ; Lnew ; C^k Þ turbulent stratified gas-liquid pipe flows. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 103, 94–105.
Ayati, A.A., Vollestad, P., Jensen, A., 2018. Detailed measurements of interfacial
10 Input N f
 dynamics in air-water pipe flow. Proc. IUTAM.
11 s = CVX(Ut N f ), W, k; ) Bai, Z., Brunton, S.L., Brunton, B.W., Kutz, J.N., Kaiser, E., Spohn, A., Noack, B.R., 2017.
Data-driven methods in fluid dynamics: Sparse classification from experimental
12 Threshold = norm(s)/ð2  Nf  K Þ data. In: Whither Turbulence and Big Data in the 21st Century? Springer, pp.
13 Sensor-Location = s(s>Threshold) 323–342.
14 N-sensor = length(Sensor-Location) Balachandar, S., Eaton, J.K., 2010. Turbulent dispersed multiphase flow. Annu. Rev.
Fluid Mech. 42, 111–133.
15 Select-M = U(Sensor-Location)
Bishop, C.M., 2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer.
16 C-new = mean(Select-M) Brennen, C.E., 2005. Fundamentals of Multiphase Flow. Cambridge University Press.
 N. Ali et al. / Chemical Engineering Science 222 (2020) 115660
Brunton, S.L., Kutz, J.N., 2019. Data-driven Science and Engineering: Machine
Learning, Dynamical Systems, and Control. Cambridge University Press.
Brunton, B.W., Brunton, S.L., Proctor, J.L., Kutz, J.N., 2016. Sparse sensor placement
optimization for classification. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 76 (5), 2099–2122.
Burkardt, J., Gunzburger, M., Lee, H.-C., 2006. POD and CVT-based reduced-order
modeling of Navier-Stokes flows. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 196 (1–3),
337–355.
Cacuci, D.G., Navon, I.M., Ionescu-Bujor, M., 2016. Computational Methods for Data
Evaluation and Assimilation. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Cao, Y., Kaiser, E., Borée, J., Noack, B.R., Thomas, L., Guilain, S., 2014. Cluster-based
analysis of cycle-to-cycle variations: application to internal combustion
engines. Exp. Fluids 55 (11), 1837.
Cozin, C., Vicencio, F.E.C., de Almeida Barbuto, F.A., Morales, R.E.M., Da Silva, M.,
Arruda, L.V.R., 2016. Two-phase slug flow characterization using artificial neural
networks. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 65 (3), 494–501.
Fisher, R.A., 1936. The use of multiple measurements in taxonomic problems.
Annals Eugen. 7 (2), 179–188.
Gao, Z.-K., Jin, N.-D., 2012. Characterization of chaotic dynamic behavior in the gas–
liquid slug flow using directed weighted complex network analysis. Physica A
391 (10), 3005–3016.
Grant, M., Boyd, S., Ye, Y., 2008. CVX: Matlab software for disciplined convex
programming, 2008.
Hernandez, J.S., Valencia, C., Ratkovich, N., Torres, C.F., Muñoz, F., 2019. Data driven
methodology for model selection in flow pattern prediction. Heliyon 5 (11),
e02718.
Holmes, P., Lumley, J.L., Berkooz, G., 1998. Turbulence, Coherent Structures,
Dynamical Systems and Symmetry. Cambridge University Press.
Hu, B., Stewart, C., Hale, C.P., Lawrence, C.J., Hall, A.R.W., Zwiens, H., Hewitt, G.F.,
2005. Development of an X-ray computed tomography (CT) system with sparse
sources: application to three-phase pipe flow visualization. Exp. Fluids 39 (4),
667–678.
Hu, B., Langsholt, M., Liu, L., Andersson, P., Lawrence, C., 2014. Flow structure and
phase distribution in stratified and slug flows measured by X-ray tomography.
Int. J. Multiphase Flow 67, 162–179.
Jaeger, J., Santos, C.M., Rosa, L.M., Meier, H.F., Noriler, D., 2018. Experimental and
numerical evaluation of slugs in a vertical air–water flow. Int. J. Multiph. Flow
101, 152–166.
Kaiser, E., Noack, B.R., Cordier, L., Spohn, A., Segond, M., Abel, M., Daviller, G., Östh, J.,
Krajnović, S., Niven, R.K., 2014. Cluster-based reduced-order modelling of a
mixing layer. J. Fluid Mech. 754, 365–414.
Kaiser, E., Morzyński, M., Daviller, G., Kutz, J.N., Brunton, B.W., Brunton, S.L., 2018.
Sparsity enabled cluster reduced-order models for control. J. Comput. Phys. 352,
388–409.
Kaiser, E., Kutz, J.N., Brunton, S.L., 2019. Data-driven approximations of dynamical
systems operators for control, arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.10239.
Kvernvold, O., Vindøy, V., Søntvedt, T., Saasen, A., Selmer-Olsen, S., 1984. Velocity
distribution in horizontal slug flow. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 10 (4), 441–457.
Lin, P., Hanratty, T.J., 1986. Prediction of the initiation of slugs with linear stability
theory. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 12 (1), 79–98.
Lloyd, S., 1982. Least squares quantization in PCM. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 28
(2), 129–137.
Manohar, K., Brunton, B.W., Kutz, J.N., Brunton, S.L., 2018. Data-driven sparse sensor
placement for reconstruction: demonstrating the benefits of exploiting known
patterns. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 38 (3), 63–86.
17
Mata, C., Pereyra, E., Trallero, J.L., Joseph, D.D., 2002. Stability of stratified gas–liquid
flows. Int. J. Multiphase Flow 28 (8), 1249–1268.
Meyer, C.D., 2000. Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra, vol. 71. Siam.
Nair, A.G., Yeh, C.-A., Kaiser, E., Noack, B.R., Brunton, S.L., Taira, K., 2019. Cluster-
based feedback control of turbulent post-stall separated flows. J. Fluid Mech.
875, 345–375.
Neogi, S., Lee, A., Jepson, W.P., 1994. A model for multiphase (gas-water-oil)
stratified flow in horizontal pipelines. In: SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas
Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Niennattrakul, V., Ratanamahatana, C.A., 2009. Learning DTW global constraint for
time series classification, arXiv preprint arXiv:0903.0041.
Norris, J.R., 1998. Markov chains, 2. Cambridge University Press.
Östh, J., Kaiser, E., Krajnović, S., Noack, B.R., 2015. Cluster-based reduced-order
modelling of the flow in the wake of a high speed train. J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerodyn. 145, 327–338.
Rao, C.R., 1948. The utilization of multiple measurements in problems of biological
classification. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodol.) 10 (2), 159–203.
Rousseeuw, P.J., 1987. Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and
validation of cluster analysis. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 20, 53–65.
Taitel, Y., Dukler, A.E., 1976. A model for predicting flow regime transitions in
horizontal and near horizontal gas-liquid flow. AIChE J. 22 (1), 47–55.
Taitel, Y., Bornea, D., Dukler, A.E., 1980. Modelling flow pattern transitions for
steady upward gas-liquid flow in vertical tubes. AIChE J. 26 (3), 345–354.
Tengesdal, J., Kaya, A.S., Sarica, C., et al., 1999. Flow-pattern transition and
hydrodynamic modeling of churn flow. SPE J. 4 (04), 342–348.
Vahabi, N., Selviah, D.R., 2018. Dimensionality Reduction and Pattern Recognition of
Flow Regime Using Acoustic Data. In: Proceedings of SAI Intelligent Systems
Conference. Springer.
Viggiano, B., Skjæraasen, O., Schümann, H., Tutkun, M., Cal, R.B., 2018a.
Characterization of flow dynamics and reduced-order description of
experimental two-phase pipe flow. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 105, 91–101.
Viggiano, B., Dib, T., Ali, N., Mastin, L.G., Cal, R.B., Solovitz, S.A., 2018b. Turbulence,
entrainment and low-order description of a transitional variable-density jet. J.
Fluid Mech. 836, 1009–1049.
Viggiano, B., Tutkun, M., Cal, R.B., 2019. Hessian-based topology of two-phase slug
flow. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 119, 84–94.
Wei, Z., Yang, Z., Xia, C., Li, Q., 2017. Cluster-based reduced-order modelling of the
wake stabilization mechanism behind a twisted cylinder. J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerodyn. 171, 288–303.
Wiedemann, P., Döß, A., Schleicher, E., Hampel, U., 2019. Fuzzy flow pattern
identification in horizontal air-water two-phase flow based on wire-mesh
sensor data. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 117, 153–162.
Wilkens, R.J., 1997. Prediction of the flow regime transitions in high pressure, large
diameter, inclined multiphase pipelines Ph.D. thesis. Ohio University.
Xie, T., Ghiaasiaan, S.M., Karrila, S., 2004. Artificial neural network approach for flow
regime classification in gas–liquid–fiber flows based on frequency domain
analysis of pressure signals. Chem. Eng. Sci. 59 (11), 2241–2251.
Zhang, H.-Q., Wang, Q., Sarica, C., Brill, J.P., 2003. A unified mechanistic model for
slug liquid holdup and transition between slug and dispersed bubble flows. Int.
J. Multiphase Flow 29 (1), 97–107.
Zhong-Ke, G., Li-Dan, H., Ning-De, J., 2013. Markov transition probability-based
network from time series for characterizing experimental two-phase flow. Chin.
Phys. B 22 (5), 050507.