MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044012834 · doi:10.3390/su7022243

Using GMDH Neural Networks to Model the Power and Torque of a Stirling Engine

2015· article· en· W2044012834 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

VenueSustainability · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Thermodynamic Systems and Engines
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStirling engineTorqueRobustness (evolution)Artificial neural networkPower (physics)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)EngineeringControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different variables affect the performance of the Stirling engine and are considered in optimization and designing activities. Among these factors, torque and power have the greatest effect on the robustness of the Stirling engine, so they need to be determined with low uncertainty and high precision. In this article, the distribution of torque and power are determined using experimental data. Specifically, a novel polynomial approach is proposed to specify torque and power, on the basis of previous experimental work. This research addresses the question of whether GMDH (group method of data handling)-type neural networks can be utilized to predict the torque and power based on determined parameters.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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