MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142201422 · doi:10.1109/iecec.1996.553420

Fuel correlations for combustion purposes: a summary of progress within the past fifteen years. II

2002· article· en· W2142201422 on OpenAlexaffabout
D. Kretschmer, J. Odgers

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCombustionIgnition systemDistillationThermodynamicsViscosityAutoignition temperatureMaterials scienceMechanicsNuclear engineeringChemistryEngineeringPhysicsPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For pt.I see ibid., p.1968-74 (1996). Over the years, many correlations for fuel properties have been developed at Laval University. The main goal in this was to provide tools to estimate unknown fuel properties from the known values of the density and the viscosity at one temperature and the ASTM D-86 distillation, since these data are easily determined. The first part of the this paper dealt with properties of liquid fuels. Most of the correlations in this second part are not so much pertinent to fuel properties per se, but rather to lean premixed flame behavior. Much of the behavior is related to two postulated temperatures, T/sub auig/ and T/sub i/. The first (the auto ignition temperature) may be regarded as the 'start' of a reaction and the second (the instantaneous, spontaneous ignition temperature) may be regarded as that temperature at which the reaction first becomes self-sustaining. Between them they account for a good deal of premixed combustion behavior.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.017

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCombustion and flame dynamicsFrench-language works237,207