MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Combustion and Detonation Processes
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

678 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
678 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 5 of 14

Labels cover 0 of 678 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 678 of 678 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

affunlabeled
Discrete effects in energetic materials
Andrew Higgins
2014· article· en· Journal of Physics Conference Series· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
17
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Investigation of marginally explosible dusts
Albert Addo, Maria Portarapillo, Almerinda Di Benedetto, Yajie Bu, Ashok G. Dastidar, Faisal Khan +1 more
2024· article· en· Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
16
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
DDT run-up distance in an obstructed tube
Shervin Hashemi Mehr, G. Ciccarelli
2023· article· en· Combustion and Flame· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
16
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Safety considerations when handling metal powders
J M Benson
2012· article· en· Journal of the Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
16
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Critical diffraction of irregular structure detonations and their predictability from experimentally obtained <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" altimg="si10.svg"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mo linebreak="goodbreak">−</mml:mo><mml:mi>κ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math> data
Farzane Zangene, Qiang Xiao, Matei I. Radulescu
2022· article· lv· Proceedings of the Combustion Institute· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
15
citations
affunlabeled
Limiting oxygen concentrations of gases
Laurence G. Britton, Martin P. Clouthier, B. Keith Harrison, Samuel A. Rodgers
2016· article· en· Process Safety Progress· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
15
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Simulation of shock-initiated ignition
J. Melguizo-Gavilanes, N. Rezaeyan, M. Lopez-Aoyagi, Luc Bauwens
2010· article· en· Shock Waves· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
14
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About