MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031652674 · doi:10.1080/01919510701549236

Artificial Neural Networks Modeling of Ozone Bubble Columns: Mass Transfer Coefficient, Gas Hold-Up, and Bubble Size

2007· article· en· W2031652674 on OpenAlexaff
Mahad Baawain, Mohamed Gamal El‐Din, Daniel Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueOzone Science and Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBubbleDimensionless quantityMass transfer coefficientArtificial neural networkMass transferSauter mean diameterCoefficient of determinationPerceptronMechanicsChemistryMaterials scienceThermodynamicsMathematicsChromatographyPhysicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims at applying artificial neural network (ANN) modeling approach in designing ozone bubble columns. Three multi-layer perceptron (MLP) ANN models were developed to predict the overall mass transfer coefficient (kLa, s−1), the gas hold-up (∊ G , dimensionless), and the Sauter mean bubble diameter (dS , m) in different ozone bubble columns using simple inputs such as bubble column's geometry and operating conditions. The obtained results showed excellent prediction of kLa, ∊ G , and dS values as the coefficient of multiple determination (R2 ) values for all ANN models exceeded 0.98. The ANN models were then used to determine the local mass transfer coefficient (kL , m.s−1). A very good agreement between the modeled and the measured kL values was observed (R2 = 0.85).

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations37
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOzone Science and EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207