MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055372843 · doi:10.1122/1.4892660

Bubble migration in two-dimensional foam sheared in a wide-gap Couette device: Effects of non-Newtonian rheology

2014· article· en· W2055372843 on OpenAlexafffund
Hadi Mohammadigoushki, Pengtao Yue, James J. Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rheology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPickering emulsions and particle stabilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBubbleRheologyShear thinningNewtonian fluidMaterials scienceMechanicsNon-Newtonian fluidShearing (physics)Couette flowClassical mechanicsComposite materialPhysicsFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report experiments on the migration of a large bubble in an otherwise monodisperse two-dimensional (2D) foam sheared in a wide-gap Couette device. The bubble migrates away from the walls toward an equilibrium position between the center of the gap and the inner cylinder. This differs from the situation in a narrow-gap Couette device, where the equilibrium position is at the center of the gap [Mohammadigoushki and Feng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 084502 (2012)]. The shift in equilibrium position is attributed to the non-Newtonian rheology of the foam, which is brought out by the nonhomogeneous shearing in a wide-gap geometry. Two aspects of the rheology, shear-thinning and the first normal stress difference, are examined separately by comparing with bubble migration in a xanthan gum solution and a Boger fluid. Shear-thinning shifts the equilibrium position inward while the normal stress does the opposite. Bubble migration in the 2D foam is the outcome of the competition between the two effects.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.359

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of RheologySame topicPickering emulsions and particle stabilizationFrench-language works237,207