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

Knock Rating of Gaseous Fuels

2003· article· en· W2081469519 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.225
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