MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1487619170 · doi:10.4271/2007-01-4143

Design Considerations in Formulating Gasoline Engine Lubricants for Improving Engine Fuel Economy and Wear Resistance Part I: Base Oils and Additives

2007· article· en· W1487619170 on OpenAlexaff
C. B. Phillips, James McQueen, Hong Gao, R. T. Stockwell, Bryant J. Hardy, Mary E. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLubricants and Their Additives
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrol engineAutomotive engineeringBase (topology)Wear resistanceGasolineEngineeringComputer scienceProcess engineeringManufacturing engineeringWaste managementMaterials scienceInternal combustion engineMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is generally accepted that significant gains in fuel economy can be accomplished by reducing friction between the moving surfaces in key engine components (e.g. valvetrain, piston, crankshaft). This paper provides an overview of how specific tribological/rheological properties (e.g. viscosity, volatility, friction coefficient, film thickness, wear volume) can be considered in the design of fuel efficient crankcase engine lubricants that promote high wear resistance. Here, an example in how base stock, viscosity modifier (VM) and friction modifier (FM) can impact the surface friction is given. Friction and wear measurements from bench level lubrication characterization test methods mainly, high frequency reciprocating rig (HFRR) and mini-traction machine (MTM), are presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicLubricants and Their AdditivesFrench-language works237,207