MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146305394 · doi:10.1115/1.1367340

Rapid and Accurate Calculation of Water and Steam Properties Using the Tabular Taylor Series Expansion Method

2001· article· en· W2146305394 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

VenueJournal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputationTaylor seriesSeries (stratigraphy)Helmholtz free energyComputer scienceHelmholtz equationApplied mathematicsRepresentation (politics)EnthalpyAlgorithmMathematicsMathematical analysisThermodynamicsPhysicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In applications where both speed and accuracy of computation of thermodynamic properties are important and particularly where the independent variables are not those used in Helmholtz equations, direct use of such equations can be excessively time-consuming. This paper introduces the enthalpy-pressure version of the tabular Taylor series (TTSE) method, which has the accuracy and computing speed required for application in power industries. The IAPWS formulation for scientific use, IAPWS-95, was used as the basic Helmholtz equation. The speed and accuracy of the TTSE have been compared with the IAPWS formulation for industrial use, IAPWS-IF97, which has been developed to achieve high-speed calculation with good representation of IAPWS-95 values. Test results show that the TTSE accurately represents the basic equation and that the computation speed is higher than that of IF97.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.390

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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