MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028119654 · doi:10.1515/1542-6580.2808

A Comprehensive Review of Just Suspended Speed in Liquid-Solid and Gas-Liquid-Solid Stirred Tank Reactors

2012· review· en· W2028119654 on OpenAlexaff
Rouzbeh Jafari, Jamal Chaouki, Philippe A. Tanguy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuspension (topology)Work (physics)Process engineeringContinuous stirred-tank reactorMechanical engineeringYield (engineering)EngineeringMaterials scienceChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For successful design and operation of Liquid-Solid (LS) and Gas-Liquid-Solid (GLS) stirred tank reactors engineers and scientists must define geometrical and operating conditions for a specific medium (specified physical properties) in such a way that provides the optimum level of solid suspension. Failure to design the stirred tank reactor to achieve optimum conditions and maintain the system at these conditions during operation may be detrimental to product quality (selectivity and yield) and cost. Successful design and operation require comprehensive knowledge about how the state of solid suspension may be affected by changing physical, operational, and geometrical parameters. Also, accurate correlations are necessary to fulfill that objective. This article intends to provide that background for scientists and engineers. It critically surveys the published work in this field and makes specific recommendations for the appropriate conditions that provide the successful operation of agitated vessels.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor EngineeringSame topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207