MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037923774 · doi:10.1364/ao.44.006773

A calibration-independent laser-induced incandescence technique for soot measurement by detecting absolute light intensity

2005· article· en· W2037923774 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Snelling, Gregory J. Smallwood, Fengshan Liu, Ömer L. Gülder, W. D. Bachalo

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSootIncandescenceMaterials scienceCalibrationOpticsPyrometerRadianceVolume fractionDiffusion flameVolume (thermodynamics)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Temperature measurementChemistryCombustionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laser-induced incandescence (LII) has proved to be a useful diagnostic tool for spatially and temporally resolved measurement of particulate (soot) volume fraction and primary particle size in a wide range of applications, such as steady flames, flickering flames, and Diesel engine exhausts. We present a novel LII technique for the determination of soot volume fraction by measuring the absolute incandescence intensity, avoiding the need for ex situ calibration that typically uses a source of particles with known soot volume fraction. The technique developed in this study further extends the capabilities of existing LII for making practical quantitative measurements of soot. The spectral sensitivity of the detection system is determined by calibrating with an extended source of known radiance, and this sensitivity is then used to interpret the measured LII signals. Although it requires knowledge of the soot temperature, either from a numerical model of soot particle heating or experimentally determined by detecting LII signals at two different wavelengths, this technique offers a calibration-independent procedure for measuring soot volume fraction. Application of this technique to soot concentration measurements is demonstrated in a laminar diffusion flame.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations264
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207