MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078812166 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450800520

Spout Shape Predictions in Spouted Beds

2002· article· en· W2078812166 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Éverton Fernando Zanoelo, Sandra C. S. Rocha

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConical surfaceAnnulus (botany)MechanicsCone (formal languages)Ligand cone angleWork (physics)GeometryMathematicsMaterials sciencePhysicsThermodynamicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A theoretical study to predict spout‐annulus interface variation with bed level for different column geometries of spouted beds is proposed. A previous mathematical model (Krzywanski et al., 1989), developed for spout shape predictions in two‐dimensional spouted beds, is here proposed to be applied also for cylindrical, conical or cone‐based cylindrical columns. Its predictions depend on the average spout diameter and on the spout expansion angle. While there exists empirical equations available to estimate the first model parameter, the second one requires a rigorous stress analysis of the particles at the entrance of the bed. To avoid this difficulty, this work proposes a simple mathematical strategy to calculate the spout expansion angle. The reliability of this approach was checked by comparison with several experimental results obtained in cone‐based cylindrical (Lim et al., 1974; Wu et al., 1987; He et al., 1998) and rectangular (Zanoelo, 1994) spouted beds.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
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

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

Citations4
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207