Influence of Fuel Aromatics Type on the Particulate Matter and NO<sub>x</sub> Emissions of a Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="htmlview paragraph">The influence of fuel aromatics type on the particulate matter (PM) and NO<sub>x</sub> exhaust emissions of a heavy-duty, single-cylinder, DI diesel engine was investigated. Eight fuels were blended from conventional and oil sands crude oil sources to form five fuel pairs with similar densities but with different poly-aromatic (1.6 to 14.6%) or total aromatic (14.3 to 39.0%) levels. The engine was tuned to meet the U.S. EPA 1994 emission standards. An eight-mode, steady-state simulation of the U.S. EPA heavy-duty transient test procedure was followed.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">The experimental results show that there were no statistically significant differences in the PM and NO<sub>x</sub> emissions of the five fuel pairs after removing the fuel sulphur content effect on PM emissions. However, there was a definite trend towards higher NO<sub>x</sub> emissions as the fuel density, poly-aromatic and total aromatic levels of the test fuels increased.</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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".