MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007303818 · doi:10.1080/01457630490459120

On Minimization of the Number of Heat Exchangers in Water Networks

2004· article· en· W2007303818 on OpenAlexaff
Mikhaı̈l Sorin, Luciana Savulescu

Bibliographic record

VenueHeat Transfer Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProcess Optimization and Integration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMixing (physics)Heat exchangerPinch analysisMinificationComputer scienceSuperstructureEnergy minimizationHeat transferMathematical optimizationThermodynamicsMechanicsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article addresses the problem of minimizing the number of heat exchangers for heat recovery as well as the number of mixing and splitting junctions within water networks while maintaining the energy targets determined by the classical pinch analysis. A new systematic approach is proposed to eliminate the kink points and linearize the composite curves. This is based on a systematic strategy that indicates how to mix and split the water streams in order to modify the shape of the initial composite curves. A new graphical thermodynamic rule that avoids the deterioration of energy targets while minimizing the number of heat transfer units as well as the mixing and splitting network complexity has been formalized. This rule permits the control of the procedure of mixing and splitting on the T-H diagram in order to guarantee the pre-established targets. The proposed approach can be used for either the manual design of heat recovery within water networks or the building of a superstructure with a limited number of feasible design options.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
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

Citations33
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeat Transfer EngineeringSame topicProcess Optimization and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207