MétaCan
ENFR
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.

Export CSVExport JSONAPI query

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 1 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
The Detonation Phenomenon
John H. S. Lee
2008· book· en· Cambridge University Press eBooks· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
1,014
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Blast overpressures from medium scale BLEVE tests
A. M. Birk, Craig R. Davison, Mark Cunningham
2007· article· en· Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
125
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
The ignition mechanism in irregular structure gaseous detonations
Matei I. Radulescu, G. J. Sharpe, J.H.S. Lee, Charles B. Kiyanda, Andrew Higgins, Ronald K. Hanson
2005· article· en· Proceedings of the Combustion Institute· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
120
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Moderation of dust explosions
Paul Amyotte, Michael J. Pegg, Faisal Khan, M. Nifuku, Tan Ying-xin
2007· article· en· Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
108
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
DDT in methane-air mixtures
М. Кузнецов, G. Ciccarelli, S.B. Dorofeev, В. И. Алексеев, Yu. Yankin, T. H. Kim
2002· article· en· Shock Waves· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
98
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
A review on lithium combustion
Martin Schiemann, Jeffrey M. Bergthorson, Peter Fischer, Viktor Scherer, Dan Taroata, Günther Schmid
2015· review· en· Applied Energy· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
96
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Initiation of detonation by conical projectiles
J. Verreault, Andrew Higgins
2010· article· en· Proceedings of the Combustion Institute· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
81
citations
afffundno abstractunlabeled
Detonability limits in thin annular channels
Jenny Chao, Hoi Dick Ng, J.H.S. Lee
2008· article· en· Proceedings of the Combustion Institute· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
71
citations
next →

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About