MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143811587 · doi:10.1115/1.4027509

A New Analytical Approach for Dynamic Modeling of Passive Multicomponent Cooling Systems

2014· article· en· W2143811587 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Gholami, Masoud Ahmadi, Majid Bahrami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electronic Packaging · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHeat sinkTransient (computer programming)Heat transferThermal resistanceThermalThermal massPassive coolingComputer coolingWater coolingElectronic componentBoundary value problemSteady state (chemistry)Electronics coolingMechanicsMechanical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsThermal management of electronic devices and systemsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new one-dimensional thermal network modeling approach is proposed that can accurately predict transient/dynamic temperature distribution of passive cooling systems. The present model has applications in variety of electronic, power electronic, photonics, and telecom systems, especially where the system load fluctuates over time. The main components of a cooling system including: heat spreaders, heat pipes, and heat sinks as well as thermal boundary conditions such as natural convection and radiation heat transfer are analyzed, analytically modeled and presented in the form of resistance and capacitance (RC) network blocks. The present model is capable of predicting the transient/dynamic (and steady state) thermal behavior of cooling system with significantly less cost of modeling compared to conventional numerical simulations. Furthermore, the present method takes into account system “thermal inertia” and is capable of capturing thermal lags in various components. The model is presented in two forms: zero-dimensional and one-dimensional which are different in terms of complicacy. A custom-designed test-bed is also built and a comprehensive experimental study is conducted to validate the proposed model. The experimental results show great agreement, less than 4.5% relative difference in comparison with the modeling results.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Electronic PackagingSame topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207