MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154153546 · doi:10.1002/aic.14644

A multiple radioactive particle tracking technique to investigate particulate flows

2014· article· en· W2154153546 on OpenAlexafffund
Majid Rasouli⃰, François Bertrand, Jamal Chaouki

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTracking (education)Particle (ecology)TRACERRange (aeronautics)Reliability (semiconductor)TrajectoryParticle tracking velocimetryParticle dynamicsMechanicsPhysicsNuclear engineeringChemistryNuclear physicsEngineeringAerospace engineeringParticle image velocimetryThermodynamicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radioactive particle tracking is a nonintrusive technique that has been successfully used to study the flow dynamics in a wide range of reactors and blenders. However, it is still limited to the tracking of only one tracer at a time. A multiple radioactive particle tracking (MRPT) technique that can determine the trajectory of two free or restricted (attached to the same particle) moving tracers in a system is introduced. The accuracy (<5 mm) and precision (<5 mm) of the proposed technique is evaluated by tracking two stationary tracers and two moving tracers. The results confirm the reliability and validity of the MRPT technique when the two tracers have the same isotope and the distance between them is not too small (>2 cm). The tracking of two sticking tracers at the two ends of a cylindrical particle in a rotating drum is also considered to illustrate the potential of this characterization method. © 2014 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 61: 384–394, 2015

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207