MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084607746 · doi:10.5539/sar.v1n1p151

Modeling Spray Droplet Size in Order to Environmental Protection

2012· article· en· W2084607746 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Leila Peyman, Shamsollah Abdollahpor, Asghar Mahmoud, Mohammad Moghaddam, Behzad Ranabonab

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Agriculture Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Surface Properties and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBody orificeNozzleParticle sizeWind speedParticle (ecology)Atmospheric pressureMechanicsVolume (thermodynamics)Spray characteristicsViscosityEnvironmental scienceMathematicsStatisticsChemistrySpray nozzleMeteorologyThermodynamicsPhysicsEngineeringEcologyMechanical engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Million liters of annual toxic solutions are used to combat pests and plant diseases and weeds in farms. Drift is one of the most critical problems which chemical applicators have to deal with. Wind drift would be highly controlled if the droplet size could be kept almost constant in stable atmospheric conditions.The most important factor in spraying is droplet size which is influenced by several factors including; spraying pressure, nozzle orifice diameter, the chemical viscosity and wind speed in the region. In this study factors affecting particle size have been studied using statistical methods. Nozzle orifice diameter and spraying pressure were considered as independent variables and particle size was chosen as the dependent variable. Analysis of variance showed that the effect of pressure and nozzle diameter and their interactive effect on particle volume mean diameter (VMD) were statistically significant at the 1% level. In order to compare the results estimated from regression equations and observed particle diameter chi-square test was used. Based on this test, the difference was not significant.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Agriculture ResearchSame topicPlant Surface Properties and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207