Effects of Exhaust Throttling on Engine Performance and Residual Gas in an SI Engine
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">Combustion in engines can be controlled by the amount of residual gas, which has high temperature and heat capacity compared with fresh charge. Residual gas also acts like a dilution gas during combustion period. Accordingly, combustion duration increases, while the peak combustion temperature and nitrogen oxides (NOx) decreases. Amount of residual gas is affected by pressure difference between exhaust and intake, valve timing and engine speed.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">The main objective of this work is to identify the effects of exhaust throttle, valve timing and load conditions on residual gas fraction and engine performance. The intake valve open timing was varied freely under fixed exhaust valve close (EVC) timing. Additionally, exhaust throttle has been installed in the exhaust manifold to build up the exhaust back-pressure allowing extra amount of exhaust gases to be admitted into the cylinder during the valve overlap duration.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">Operation of exhaust throttle also increases exhaust gas temperature and pumping loss. However, it reduces NOx and hydrocarbon (HC) emissions. The results show that the variation of valve overlap duration with exhaust throttle provides a wider range of residual gas fraction (RGF) without much influence on engine performance.</div>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it