MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057392309 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20403

Flow regimes and vertical solids conveying in a spout‐fluid bed with a draft tube

2011· article· en· W2057392309 on OpenAlex
Hiroshi Nagashima, Toshifumi Ishikura, Mitsuharu Ide

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDraft tubeEntrainment (biomusicology)MechanicsTube (container)Flow (mathematics)Materials sciencePhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pressure fluctuation data were obtained in a semi‐cylindrical spout‐fluid bed with draft tube, and statistical analyses of them were employed to recognise flow regimes. Also, the effects of spouting‐gas and auxiliary‐gas velocities, and length of entrainment zone on solids loading ratio in a draft tube were examined. As a result, five flow regimes appeared by changing spouting‐gas and auxiliary‐gas velocities and it was found that the simplest method to determine flow regime is to measure pressure fluctuations in a draft tube. Moreover, solids loading ratio could be controlled flexibly by auxiliary‐gas velocity and length of entrainment zone.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.159
Teacher spread0.151 · 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