MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165188055 · doi:10.1002/jssc.200800671

Transverse diffusion of laminar flow profiles – a generic method for mixing reactants in capillary microreactor

2009· review· en· W2165188055 on OpenAlexafffund
Svetlana M. Krylova, Victor Okhonin, Sergey N. Krylov

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicroreactorLaminar flowCapillary actionMixing (physics)DiffusionLaminar flow reactorChemistryFlow (mathematics)ChromatographyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceChemical engineeringMechanicsThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryOpen-channel flowCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The capillary is an attractive format for integrated microanalyses, which start with the injection of separate reactants into the capillary and their mixing inside the capillary. Due to the nonturbulent nature of flow inside the capillary, mixing reactants in a generic way is a challenging task. Three approaches have been suggested as a solution: mixing by electrophoresis, mixing by longitudinal diffusion, and, most recently, mixing by transverse diffusion of laminar flow profiles (TDLFP). This is the first review on TDLFP, describing: (i) the physical basis of the method, (ii) its theory, (iii) analytical and numerical solutions for the calculation of concentration profiles of mixed reactants, (iv) up-to-date applications, and (v) problems to be solved and future directions.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations60
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicMicrofluidic and Capillary Electrophoresis ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207