MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084523553 · doi:10.1177/0734904114529403

Using helium smoke as a surrogate of fire smoke for the study of atrium smoke filling

2014· article· en· W2084523553 on OpenAlexaff
Guanchao Zhao, Liangzhu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fire Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmokeHeliumPlumeEnvironmental scienceNuclear engineeringMechanicsMaterials scienceChemistryMeteorologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study developed a method of using pure helium to generate a cold buoyant plume as the surrogate of a fire smoke for the study of the smoke-filling process in an atrium. Aided by the numerical simulations, a series of experiments in a 1:26.5 scale model of the full-size atrium with the fires up to 1.6 MW from the literature were conducted to investigate the similarity between a helium smoke and a hot fire smoke. Helium concentrations, smoke layer heights, and smoke optical densities were compared well between the current experiment and the simulations. The experimental study thus verified the capability of a helium smoke test to reproduce the smoke-filling process of the corresponding hot smoke test in the atrium studied. This study also showed how to model a hot smoke test with a t-squared fire by the corresponding helium smoke test by pre-mixing helium and artificial smoke in a mixing box.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fire SciencesSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207