The influence of the particle size distribution on fluidized bed hydrodynamics using high‐throughput experimentation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The goal of the described project is to design mixtures of particles with optimal fluidization properties. Using high‐throughput experimentation, a novel approach to study hydrodynamics in fluidized beds, the relevant properties can be obtained in a limited period of time. This approach is demonstrated by assessing the influence of particle size distribution on fluidized bed hydrodynamics of Geldart A powders. By manipulating the width of the particle size distribution of alumina powder, the bubble diameter is reduced up to 40%. The addition of fines to a given particle size distribution also decreases the bubble diameter up to 40%, whereas the addition of coarse particles hardly influences the bubble size. At low gas velocities, the bubble size was found to increase with fines addition or increasing standard deviation. © 2009 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J, 2009
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it