MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081469519 · doi:10.1115/1.1560707

Knock Rating of Gaseous Fuels

2003· article· en· W2081469519 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Attar, G. A. Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsButaneMethanePropaneCompression ratioBinary numberSPARK (programming language)Equivalence ratioIgnition systemHydrogenMaterials scienceThermodynamicsCompression (physics)ChemistryOrganic chemistryPhysicsMathematicsCombustionCatalysisComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The knock tendency in spark ignition engines of binary mixtures of hydrogen, ethane, propane and n-butane is examined in a CFR engine for a range of mixture composition, compression ratio, spark timing, and equivalence ratio. It is shown that changes in the knock characteristics of binary mixtures of hydrogen with methane are sufficiently different from those of the binary mixtures of the other gaseous fuels with methane that renders the use of the methane number of limited utility. However, binary mixtures of n-butane with methane may offer a better alternative. Small changes in the concentration of butane produce almost linearly significant changes in both the values of the knock limited compression ratio for fixed spark timing and the knock limited spark timing for a fixed compression ratio.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and PowerSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207