Distribution of mixing efficiency in a split‐cylinder gas‐lift bioreactor for <i>Yarrowia lipolytica</i> suspensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The distribution of mixing efficiency in a split‐cylinder gas‐lift bioreactor has been investigated for Y. lipolytica suspensions with cells concentration varying between 10 and 50 g/l d.w. The results indicated important variation of mixing time on the height of riser or downcomer, as well as different behaviour of suspensions flows in these two regions. Thus, the less intense mixing for the upward circulation has been recorded for the bottom region, while the most efficient mixing was reached at the top position at higher biomass concentration and aeration rate. This variation is similar to that observed for the downcomer, the intermediary positions being associated with the lowest efficiency of mixing for concentrated yeast cells suspension, due to the bubbles entrapping coalescence and stratification phenomena. The influence of air input rate on turbulence extent is positive only for the superior regions of the riser. For the other positions inside the gas‐lift bioreactor this parameter effect depends on the biomass concentration. By means of the experimental data and using MATLAB software, mathematical correlations for mixing time have been proposed for each circulation region, taking into consideration both the operational parameters and the distance from the bioreactor bottom. These equations offer a good concordance with the experiment, the average deviation being 5.1 % for the riser and 5.6 % for the downcomer zone.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".