MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334750332 · doi:10.1115/imece2002-33497

The Onset of Gas Entrainment From a Stratified Two-Phase Region Through a Single Side-Oriented Branch

2002· article· en· W2334750332 on OpenAlexaff
Mahmoud Ahmed, K. Lenard, Ibrahim Hassan, Nabil Esmail

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFroude numberMechanicsSink (geography)Entrainment (biomusicology)Critical point (mathematics)PhysicsMathematicsGeometryMeteorologyFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new theoretical investigation has been conducted for the prediction of the critical height at the onset of gas entrainment during single discharge from a stratified two-phase region through a branch installed on an inclined flat wall. Two models have been developed; a simplified point-sink model and a more-accurate finite-branch. The predicted critical height at the onset of gas entrainment was proven to be a function of Froude number (Fr) and density ratio of the interface fluids. The results of the predicted critical height at the onset of gas entrainment, at low values of Fr (<10), were found to be more accurate when using the finite-branch analysis compared to the results found using the pink-sink analysis. Whereas, with increasing Fr, the predicted values of both models converged to the same value. Furthermore, the point-sink analysis was demonstrated to be independent of wall inclination angle, while the finite-branch analysis showed a slight decrease in the value of the critical height with increasing wall inclination angle. Three different experimental data sets at wall inclination angles of zero, 45 and 90 degrees (i.e. side, inclined and bottom branches) were used in the following study for the comparisons between the experimental and theoretically predicted results. A good concurrence was illustrated between the experimental and theoretical values.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207