MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285742748 · doi:10.4271/2008-01-0249

Prediction Snow Ingress into Air Intake System

2008· article· en· W2285742748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Akio Takamura, Isao Saito

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Passenger Cars - Mechanical Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toyama
KeywordsSnowEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">The following two objectives were set for the development of predictions for snow ingress into the air intake system.</div> <div class="htmlview paragraph"> <ul class="list disc"> <li class="list-item"><div class="htmlview paragraph">To enable snow ingress predictions in the design stage so that vehicles can be developed in a short period of time.</div></li> <li class="list-item"><div class="htmlview paragraph">To guarantee performance in very cold regions such as Canada.</div></li> </ul> </div> <div class="htmlview paragraph">To achieve these objectives, it was decided to develop snow ingress prediction tools that use computational fluid dynamics (CFD). First, research was conducted in Canada to collect the snow information that was required for the simulation. In this research, snow particle measurement equipment was used to measure in detail the number of snow particles and their diameters. The research results that were obtained were reflected in the simulation, and a correlation was found between the calculations and test results obtained in Canada. Finally, tools were developed to facilitate results analysis from the snow ingress simulation. These analysis tools will be useful when formulating countermeasures against snow ingress or for deepening designer understanding of the phenomenon.</div>

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Passenger Cars - Mechanical SystemsSame topicWinter Sports Injuries and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207