Benchmarking of Gas‐Assisted Atomization Systems for Liquid Disintegration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Four different gas‐assisted atomizer systems are compared to assess their atomization performance for water and polymer solution feeds. An external mixing twin‐fluid atomizer serving as standard atomization configuration is compared to three rather unconventional atomization techniques. An internal mixing atomization system is represented by an effervescent atomizer that can be operated at lower air‐to‐liquid ratio than the conventional gas atomizers. Superheated atomization is an innovative technique to enhance the atomization of liquids by a phase change within the emerging spray. CO 2 ‐assisted atomization takes the same line by releasing a liquid saturated with CO 2 into a lower pressure environment. The atomization configurations were used to disintegrate the model fluid water and more challenging polymer solutions with higher viscosities. Resulting spray configurations and drop sizes distributions were compared.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it