Comparison of the Cyclic Variability of an Exhaust Gas Temperature Sensor and In-Cylinder Pressure Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a concept of an exhaust temperature sensor as a method to monitor cyclic variability of combustion. The goal is to determine if the cycle-to-cycle fluctuations of the sensor can be related to the cyclic variability of combustion as measured by a pressure transducer. Experiments were conducted with a port fuel spark ignition engine at different engine speeds and loads. For each operating point, different spark timing and different excess ratios were used to evaluate the sensitivity of the temperature-based sensor to quantify the cyclic variability of combustion as measured by the Coefficient of Variation (COV). The results demonstrated the sensitivity of the concept to relatively low levels of cyclic variability (circa 1–3% COV of IMEP). At a given speed and load, changes in cyclic variability indicated by in-cylinder pressure measurement were, in general, reproduced by the sensor. The relationship between the cyclic variability indications provided by the two sensors varied as the speed and load were changed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".