MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065935008 · doi:10.1080/02786826.2013.802761

An Instrument for the Classification of Aerosols by Particle Relaxation Time: Theoretical Models of the Aerodynamic Aerosol Classifier

2013· article· en· W2065935008 on OpenAlexaff
Farzan Tavakoli, Jason S. Olfert

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol Science and Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAerodynamicsMechanicsAerosolCylinderPhysicsGeometryMathematicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new aerosol particle classifier, the aerodynamic aerosol classifier (AAC), is presented and its classifying characteristics are determined theoretically. The AAC consists of two rotating coaxial cylinders rotating at the same angular velocity. The aerosol to be classified enters through a gap in the inner cylinder and is carried axially by particle-free sheath flow. The centrifugal force causes the particles between the rotating cylinders to move in the radial direction and particles of a narrow range of particle relaxation times exit the classifier through a gap in the outer cylinder with the sample flow. Particles with larger relaxation times impact and adhere to the outer cylinder and particles with smaller relaxation times exit the classifier with the exhaust flow. Thus, the aerosol is classified by particle relaxation time from which the aerodynamic equivalent diameter can easily be found. Four theoretical models of the instrument transfer function are developed. Analytical particle streamline models (with and without the effects of particle diffusion), like those often used for mobility classifiers, are developed for the case when the centrifugal acceleration field is assumed to be uniform in the radial direction. More accurate models are developed when this assumption is not made. These models are the analytical limiting trajectory model which neglects the effects of diffusion and a numerical convective diffusion model that does not. It is shown that these models agree quite well when the gap between the cylinders is small compared to the radii of the cylinders. The models show that, theoretically, the AAC has a relatively wide classification range and high resolution. Copyright 2013 American Association for Aerosol Research

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations113
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerosol Science and TechnologySame topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207