MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054674335 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450790405

Experimental study of a reverse flow catalytic converter for a dual fuel engine

2001· article· en· W2054674335 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Benlin Liu, M. David Checkel, Robert E. Hayes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatalytic converterTransient (computer programming)Flow (mathematics)Diesel engineExhaust gasAutomotive engineeringCold start (automotive)Materials scienceHoneycombVolumetric flow rateEnvironmental scienceNuclear engineeringWaste managementMechanicsEngineeringComputer sciencePhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theperformance of a reverse flow catalytic converter for a methane/diesel dual fuel engine, a monolith honeycomb converter with palladium catalyst washcoat, was evaluated under steady and transient engine conditions. The reverse flow converter provided superior performance (that is, higher conversion of pollutants) for several steady engine operations, compared with unidirectional flow operation. For transient operation following a step change in engine operating conditions, reverse flow is better than unidirectional flow when the change in engine operation results in a reduction in exhaust gas temperature. For an increasing exhaust gas temperature, reverse flow decreased the rate of increase of reactor temperature. The reverse flow converter was tested using the transient Japanese 6‐Mode tests. Reverse flow operation gave higher conversions than unidirectional flow for this test, with a switch time of 5 s giving the best results.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207