MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2002· article· en· W2153020912 on OpenAlexafffund
Fayi Zhou, Faye Hicks, P. M. Steffler

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
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 head0.015
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

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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations65
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hydraulic EngineeringSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207