MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123041714 · doi:10.1109/ias.1989.96939

Electric field in a hexagonal cylinder electrostatic precipitator

2003· article· en· W2123041714 on OpenAlexaff
J.R. Dryden, Z. Kucerovsky

Bibliographic record

VenueConference Record of the IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual Meeting · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformal mapCylinderElectric fieldHexagonal crystal systemGeometryDipolePlanarHomogeneity (statistics)Materials sciencePhysicsOpticsMathematicsComputer scienceCrystallographyChemistryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A conformal mapping method is used for the theoretical determination of the electric field intensity in an electrostatic precipitator module consisting of a hexagonal-cylinder outer envelope and a thin, stressed, centered electrode. The interior of the hexagonal cylinder (its cross section) is mapped conformally onto the interior of a unit circle using a suitable Schwarz-Christoffel transformation. Lines of constant potential inside the hexagonal enclosure are obtained as the images of constant potential circles within the unit circle. The field configuration supported by the cylindrical precipitator are compared to those of circular-cylinder and planar structures with regard to the predictability of performance, efficiency, ease of scaling, and field homogeneity. The technique used offers simplicity as its main advantage. The results suggest that the hexagonal cylinder precipitator combines the advantages of the circular-cylinder and the planar structures. In addition, the hexagonal module has good mechanical properties and is inexpensive. A precipitator of a large capacity and predictable behavior can be created out of a number of identical hexagonal modules.>

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference Record of the IEEE Industry Applications Society Annual MeetingSame topicAerosol Filtration and Electrostatic PrecipitationFrench-language works237,207