MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154736920 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450800203

Modified volume expansion method for measuring gas holdup

2002· article· en· W2154736920 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Annie X. Meng, Gordon A. Hill, Ajay K. Dalai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAirliftVolume (thermodynamics)MechanicsDissipationVolume expansionSignificant differenceTube (container)Materials scienceBioreactorChromatographyChemistryMathematicsThermodynamicsPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A simple, modified volume expansion method, or inclined tube method, is compared to the pressure difference method for determining gas holdup in an airlift bioreactor. The modified volume expansion method could be used for all pneumatic bioreactors where fluid fluctuation is vigorous and visual observation of the continuous phase rise is difficult. The overall gas holdup data measured using the inclined tube method are shown to be very close to overall gas holdup determined using a gamma ray density monitor system. However, the overall gas holdup measured by the pressure difference method is found to be significantly different. This difference is due to energy dissipation in the External Loop Airlift Bioreactor (ELAB) used in this study, which causes the pressure difference method to be incorrect.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.168 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207