MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043505854 · doi:10.1002/htj.10064

Performance evaluation of heat exchanger using alternative refrigerant R407C

2002· article· en· W2043505854 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Masayuki Nonaka, Hiroaki Matsushima, Kazuhiro Endoh, Kazuya Matsuo, Kazuo Fujibayashi

Bibliographic record

VenueHeat Transfer-Asian Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZeotropic mixtureRefrigerantHeat exchangerThermodynamicsEvaporatorCondenser (optics)Air source heat pumpsMaterials scienceHeat pumpAir conditioningEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract R22 (HCFC22) has been widely used as the refrigerant in air conditioners. According to the Montreal protocol for ozone layer protection, the total production of HCFCs has been capped since the beginning of 1996. Zeotropic refrigerant mixture R407C and nearly azeotropic refrigerant mixture R410A have been selected as alternatives to R22. We examined refrigerant passages in heat exchangers used in heat pump‐type room air conditioners using zeotropic refrigerant R407C through simulation, and obtained the following conclusions. In an indoor heat exchanger, a counter flow configuration when operating as a condenser has higher temperature efficiency. When an outdoor heat exchanger operates as an evaporator, a configuration that suppresses the temperature glide by partially reducing the refrigerant passage not only produces high efficiency, but also reduces the frost formation on fins. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Heat Trans Asian Res, 31(8): 626–638, 2002; Published online in Wiley InterScience ( www.interscience.wiley.com ). DOI 10.1002/htj.10064

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeat Transfer-Asian ResearchSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207