MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910701376

Pressure Drop Evaluation of Silencers

2014· article· en· W1910701376 on OpenAlex
Ramani Ramakrishnan, Tooraj Yousefi

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilencerPressure dropBaffleDuct (anatomy)AcousticsHVACASHRAE 90.1EngineeringMechanicsMechanical engineeringPhysicsMeteorologyAir conditioning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Porous materials are usually applied in HVAC system ducts as passive silencers.  The introduction of silencer materials such as baffles in the duct stream produces pressure drop to the fan system.  The pressure drop measured in pascals becomes significant in elbow silencers where 90 degree turns are the norm.  The pressure drop of elbow silencer systems were evaluated using a CFD method as well as simple ASHRAE procedures.  The comparison of the two methods is presented in this paper.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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