MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2081550578 · doi:10.1117/12.631074

Passive remote monitoring of multi-gas mixtures by FTIR radiometry

2005· article· en· W2081550578 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Marc Thériault, Eldon Puckrin, Hugo Lavoie, François Bouffard

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadianceRadiometryMaterials scienceFourier transform infrared spectroscopyRemote sensingSpectroscopyInfraredInterferometrySpectral lineAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsPhysicsChemistryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The passive remote monitoring of multi-gas vapour mixtures by FTIR spectroscopy is investigated experimentally. The spectral radiance data were collected with the CATSI interferometer for a variety of multi-gas plumes at a distance of 60 m. Two basic sets of mixtures were studied. The first set corresponds to mixtures formed of three gases with no overlapping spectral bands (C2H2, C2H4 and R14). The second set corresponds to mixtures formed of three gases having overlapping spectral bands (C2H4, R114 and R134a). For each mixture the flow rates of individual constituents were adjusted to yield specific constituent CL ratios. These ratios are compared to the CL ratios retrieved from infrared radiance spectra. Results of this study indicate that for both sets of multi-gas mixtures the CL ratios retrieved by the passive remote monitoring technique agree well with those derived from the release flow rates. This good level of agreement was achieved by introducing a simple correction scheme to compensate for the limited accuracy of the fast radiance model implemented in the GASEM monitoring algorithm.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicCombustion and flame dynamics→French-language works237,207→