MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013933763 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450790417

Improving the prediction of irrigated pressure drop in packed absorption towers

2001· article· en· W2013933763 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Simon Piché, Faı̈çal Larachi, Bernard P. A. Grandjean

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelative standard deviationPressure dropApproximation errorArtificial neural networkAbsolute deviationDrop (telecommunication)Standard deviationPacked bedMathematicsMaterials scienceStatisticsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ThermodynamicsComputer scienceChemistryArtificial intelligencePhysicsEngineeringChromatographyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Various tools estimating irrigated pressure drop in gas–liquid counter‐current randomly dumped packed beds are carefully examined through the perception of a comprehensive database. The reported measurements consisting of Cs . 5000 experiments represent an important portion of the non‐proprietary information released in the literature. Artificial neural network (ANN) modeling is proposed to refine the accuracy and broadness in predicting the irrigated pressure drop across the bed. The ANN correlation [ f LCC = f ( Re G , Ga G , Re L , Ga L , St L , S B , χ)] yields an average absolute relative error (AARE) of 20.0% and a standard deviation on the AARE of 19.8% for the whole database and remains in accordance with the physical evidence reported in the literature.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.162
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Citations15
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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