A Simple Method for Initial Condensed-Phase Combustion Reactions Predictions
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
Abstract Combustion modeling of energetic materials has undergone a tremendous amount of development in recent years. Gas-phase combustion properties predictions are possible and have been shown to agree with experimental results. For solid energetic materials, the gasification reaction products must be determined if gas-phase models are to be applied. The majority of actual models still involve a guessing step for gasification products due to the lack of knowledge in the condensed phase. Quantum dynamical calculations are presently the only way to predict initial condensed-phase reactions but require tremendous computing power, thus limiting their application. In this work, an empirical method that uses spectroscopic measurements of energetic molecules as the source for the complete modal molecular picture is presented. The method enables a qualitative prediction of the first combustion reaction in the condensed phase. The application of the methods with nitrocellulose and nitroguanidine shows that it predicts initial reactions matching the current ideas used in modeling.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it