MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091543434 · doi:10.1002/ppsc.200700031

On Preparation of Non‐Disrupted Particles by Spray Pyrolysis

2008· article· en· W2091543434 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

VenueParticle & Particle Systems Characterization · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCubic zirconiaParticle (ecology)PyrolysisPorosityZirconiumSpray pyrolysisImpurityChemical engineeringMaterials scienceSolventChemistryCeramicComposite materialNanotechnologyMetallurgyThin filmOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using spray pyrolysis, solid fully‐filled zirconia particles were synthesized at relatively high reactor temperatures (∼ 400 °C) by adding NaCl as impurities to zirconium hydroxychloride (ZHC) precursor that would have lead to the formation of hollow disrupted particles otherwise. FE‐SEM images show that at comparable concentration of NaCl and ZHC both cubic and spherical NaCl/ZrO 2 particles form. The particle characteristics were varied by varying solute concentration, type, and solvent content. Addition of NaCl caused the formation of both cubic and spherical particles which were non‐disrupted at even high temperatures. According to the EDS compositional analysis, the cubic particles had more Na content while the spherical ones had higher Zr content. It is concluded that growth mechanism of NaCl particles is different from that of zirconia particles. Drying of the former even at high temperatures leads to the formation of solid, fully‐filled, porous particles, whereas hollow, disrupted particles are formed using the latter.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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