MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035013447 · doi:10.1115/1.4004591

Slip-Flow in Microchannels of Non-Circular Cross Sections

2011· article· en· W2035013447 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluids Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlip (aerodynamics)LimitingBoundary value problemMechanicsGeometryFlow (mathematics)MathematicsCross section (physics)Mathematical analysisPhysicsEngineeringMechanical engineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Closed form solutions are presented for fully developed pressure driven slip-flow in straight microchannels of uniform noncircular cross-sections. To achieve this goal, starting from the general solution of the Poisson’s equation in the cylindrical coordinate, a least-squares-matching of boundary values is employed for applying the slip boundary condition at the wall. Then the application of boundary conditions for three different types of cross sections is examined. While the model is general enough to be extended to almost any arbitrary cross section, microchannels of polygonal (with circular as a limiting case), rectangular, and rhombic cross sections are analyzed in this study. The results are then successfully compared to the existing data 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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.485
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · 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