MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2395610607

Proposed Refrigerant Alternatives at Boise State University

2016· article· en· W2395610607 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jordan Lemons, Connor Grossman, Chelsy Melander, Sam Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueScholar Works (Boise State University) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefrigerantEnvironmental scienceState (computer science)Computer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringGas compressor
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Refrigerant usage has been under scrutiny in the last 25 years due to the Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) of the most commonly used refrigerants. The Montreal Protocol called for the phase out of Chloroflourocarbons (CFC) and Hydrochloroflourocarbons (HCFC) refrigerants in response to the problem of ozone depletion. Because of the Ozone Depletion Potential (ODP) and high Global Warming Potential (GWP) of these refrigerants they have been and are in the process of being phased out. With this phase out comes the use of Hydroflourocarbons (HFC), which have no ODP but still have high GWP. Our proposed refrigerant alternatives to those currently in use at Boise State University are Ammonia, which is currently used in chillers to refrigerate food products, Propane, which is used in small scale refrigerants on an occasional basis, and R-1234yf which is a hydrofluoroolefin (HFO) that is currently in the research and development stage for use in automobile air conditioning units. These alternatives are proposed because of their low to nonexistent ODP and GWP, but are currently in the research and development stage for use in large scale chillers.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.005

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholar Works (Boise State University)Same topicResearch, Science, and AcademiaFrench-language works237,207