MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004477810 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450790605

Sequential experimental design for estimation and analysis of thermal parameters in a fixed bed

2001· article· en· W2004477810 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samuel Conceição de Oliveira, Eduardo César Dechechi, Rubens Maciel Filho, José Teixeira Freire, Bueno

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermal conductivityThermalBoundary value problemMechanicsHomogeneousVolume (thermodynamics)InletHeat transfer coefficientThermodynamicsHeat transferMaterials scienceBoundary (topology)Position (finance)MathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The analysis of the effective radial thermal conductivity and the film heat transfer coefficient were carried out in a fixed bed. The temperature profiles were described by two‐dimensional pseudo‐homogeneous model. The thermal parameters were estimated using a sequential experimental design technique. The minimum volume criterion was used to design the next point for temperature measurement in the bed. The utilization of T = T0 (constant) as the boundary condition at the bed inlet resulted in an axial variation of thermal parameters, which was the factor responsible for the inadequacy of the model in fitting experimental data of different bed heights simultaneously. Using T = T(r) as the boundary condition makes the thermal parameters independent of the axial position and the model statiscally adequate to describe the axial and radial temperature profiles throughout the bed.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207