MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072253599 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22024

Development and experimental validation of a computational model for the analysis of transient events in a natural gas distribution network

2014· article· en· W2072253599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julio Cézar de Almeida, José Antonio Velásquez, Renato Barbieri

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeakage (economics)MechanicsTransient (computer programming)Natural gasCompressibilityNetwork modelComputational fluid dynamicsWork (physics)Flow (mathematics)Pipe network analysisTransient flowSimulationMaterials scienceComputer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents a computational model developed for studying flow behaviour when a transient event, such as a leakage, occurs in a natural gas distribution network. This model is based on the method of characteristics, which was applied to solve the equations that describe a one‐dimensional, unsteady, compressible flow that is subjected to heat transfer and friction between the fluid and the pipe walls. In order to validate the computational model, data obtained via simulation were compared with values measured in an experimental setup 140 m in length, which was built using carbon‐steel ducts of two inches nominal diameter. Experiments simulating a leakage due to a rupture in a pipework were performed using both compressed air and natural gas. The comparison showed good agreement between simulated and measured values, thus encouraging the utilization of the computational model for field monitoring and geographical location of leakage points along a natural gas network.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207