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 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

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.

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)0.003
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.070
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