Valorisation des fluides de coupe usés: Partie I : cas des techniques membranaires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
http://www.pro-environnement.com/environnement/DST/valorisation-des-fluides-de-coupe-uses-partie-i-cas-des-techniques-membranaires-c41dbbdc3b9041i1423.htm In order to regenerate used cutting fluid in mechanic industries, ultrafiltration has been studied firstly with a micro-emulsion (thin droplets) and secondly with a solution (less thin droplets). As well foreign oils as bacterial contamination are removed from the micro-emulsion, on the other hand, positive corrosion tests carried out on the filtrate do not allowed it reuse. On the other hand, filtrate obtained from the used cutting fluid solution can be reused as lubricant with some additive adds. Dans le but de valoriser les fluides de coupe usés de l'industrie de la mécanique, un fluide de type microémulsion et un fluide de type solution ont été étudiés en ultrafiltration. Pour la microémulsion usée, l'ultrafiltration élimine les huiles étrangères et la contamination bactérienne, par contre les tests de corrosion positifs effectués sur le perméat obtenu rendent son utilisation impossible pour fabriquer une nouvelle microémulsion. Par contre, le perméat obtenu à partir du fluide de coupe usé de type solution peut être réutilisé comme lubrifiant après addition de certains additifs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".