MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024092640 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20205

<i>Retracted</i>: Influence of an orifice on liquid–liquid two phase flow

2009· article· en· W2024092640 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dhurjati Prasad Chakrabarti, Gargi Das, Prasanta Kumar Das

Post-publication record

NatureRetraction
ReasonDuplication of Text;Euphemisms for Duplication;
Date10/25/2021 0:00
Flagged by OpenAlex?Yes

Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody orificeOrifice plateFlow conditioningFlow (mathematics)MechanicsRepeatabilityTwo-phase flowFlow coefficientMaterials scienceDispersion (optics)OpticsPhysicsChemistryTurbulenceEngineeringReynolds numberChromatographyMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present study aims an in depth investigation of liquid–liquid horizontal flow through an orifice. Initial studies have been directed to observe the influence of the orifice plate on the phase distribution of the two liquids in the pipe. The flow patterns have been identified using an optical probe along with photographic technique. The probability density function (PDF) analysis of the random signals obtained from the optical probe has been adopted to quantify the observations. The cross‐correlation function between the probe signals upstream and downstream of the orifice has been estimated to check the repeatability of the phenomenon. The inception of dispersion in the downstream section has been observed to occur in the stratified region of the upstream. The use of an orifice as a homogenizer as well as a feasible flow‐metering device for liquid–liquid flow has been encouraged by experimental results.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
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 score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFlow Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207