MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983578182 · doi:10.1021/la0472854

Surface-Ascension of Discrete Liquid Drops via Experimental Reactive Wetting and Lattice Boltzmann Simulation

2005· article· en· W1983578182 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLattice Boltzmann Simulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWettingLattice Boltzmann methodsMaterials scienceSurface (topology)Contact angleMechanicsChemistryPhysicsComposite materialGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reactive-wetting technique is employed to move liquid against gravitational force. Experiments have shown that the velocity of an ascending liquid drop is constant, unlike the gradual decrease intuitively linked to objects against gravitation. The ascending velocity decreases for increasing slope. The maximum inclination, or stopping, angle for this particular setup is >25 degrees . Computer simulation of a reactive-wetting drop using the lattice Boltzmann method is also performed. The results indicate that the method employed is suitable for the task, producing most experimentally observable responses. The mass flow of a liquid drop under reactive wetting was studied through simulation results, and a general description of the reactive-wetting phenomenon was deduced.

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 score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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