MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ON THE EXPLICIT DETERMINATION OF THE CHAPMAN-JOUGUET PARAMETERS FOR AN EXPLOSIVE COMPOUND

2015· article· en· W2022899067 on OpenAlexaff
D. Nandlall

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical Propulsion · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTATBExplosive materialDetonationThermodynamicsShock (circulatory)Detonation velocityEquation of stateWork (physics)Materials scienceAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Function (biology)Range (aeronautics)Adiabatic processMechanicsChemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistryComputer scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work re-examines earlier development and current advances of the shock Hugoniots in anticipation of developing an explicit solution to determine the Chapman−Jouguet (C-J) parameters for an explosive compound. A new and simple equation for the C-J specific density was obtained as a function of three measureable parameters: initial density, detonation velocity, and the heat of detonation. For the ratio of specific heats, γ, an explicit expression as a function of the C-J parameters was obtained. The relations were tested for the very well-characterized explosives PETN, HMX, RDX, TATB, TNT, and the calculated values obtained for the C-J parameters and γ compared very well with published experimental values. The equations were then applied to a broad range of explosives types regardless of their heterogeneity or their physical state and the C-J parameters obtained compared very well with published values.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Energetic Materials and Chemical PropulsionSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207