MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976168680 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450810608

Catalytic Combustion Kinetics: Using a Direct Search Algorithm to Evaluate Kinetic Parameters from Light‐Off Curves

2003· article· en· W1976168680 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert E. Hayes, François Bertrand, Charles Audet, Stan T. Kolaczkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionKinetic energyTransient (computer programming)AlgorithmMass transferExpression (computer science)KineticsMonolithFlow (mathematics)ThermodynamicsHeat transferCatalysisMechanicsPattern searchReaction rate constantCatalytic combustionChemistryMaterials scienceComputer sciencePhysicsPhysical chemistryClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes a method for evaluating the kinetic constants in a rate expression for catalytic combustion applications using experimental light‐off curves. The method uses a transient one‐dimensional single channel monolith finite element reactor model to simulate reactor performance. The heat and mass transfer models used account for developing flow in the entrance region. A parameter global optimization routine based on a generalized pattern Search algorithm is used to determine the best fit parameters in the rate expression for the oxidation of CO and mixtures of CO and CH4. The algorithm is compared to a more classical gradient method, the Fletcher‐Reeves method.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207