MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Observations of Air–Water Interaction in a Rapidly Filling Horizontal Pipe

2002· article· en· W2153020912 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hydraulic Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAir entrainmentBody orificeAir waterDrainageEntrainment (biomusicology)Pipe flowOrifice plateOscillation (cell signaling)OutflowAirflowWater flowGeotechnical engineeringGeologyEnvironmental scienceMechanicsEngineeringTurbulenceChemistryPhysicsAcousticsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of an observational study related to the behavior of drainage sewers under conditions of hydraulic overloading. Specifically, the investigation focuses on the interaction of water and trapped air in surcharging drainage and pressurized pipeline systems, by studying the air–water flow behavior in a rapidly filling horizontal pipe. Air–water interface patterns, air entrainment, and air release through an orifice at the pipe end are documented photographically. Synchronously recorded pressure traces are also presented to illustrate the relation between the air–water phase evolution and the pressure oscillation patterns. Depending on the air release rate of the orifice, there are three types of pressure oscillation behavior, each corresponding to a particular behavior of the air–water interface in the rapidly filling horizontal pipe.

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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.172 · 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