MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083263473 · doi:10.1615/atomizspr.v16.i8.70

TRAJECTORY OF WATER JET EXPOSED TO LOW SUBSONIC CROSS-FLOW

2006· article· en· W2083263473 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtomization and Sprays · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJet (fluid)NozzleMechanicsSupersonic speedPhysicsRange (aeronautics)Momentum (technical analysis)TrajectoryFlow (mathematics)Flux (metallurgy)Classical mechanicsMaterials scienceAerospace engineeringThermodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A water jet exposed to a low subsonic air cross-flow was studied experimentally to determine the jet/spray trajectory based on the jet's upper boundary. The nozzle diameter as well as the cross-flow and water jet speeds were varied to provide a wide range of experimental conditions. Although this study is not entirely novel, the results of previous research are extended to low subsonic cross-flows having a maximum axial velocity of about 70 m/s. The previous assertion that data from the supersonic range could be extrapolated straightforwardly to subsonic cases was shown to be largely true, even over a wider range of momentum flux ratios than those considered previously. In addition, an attempt was made to identify and discuss the possible reasons behind the lack of a universal jet/spray trajectory correlation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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