Evaluation Of Vapour Compression Refrigeration System Using R407C And R507
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<em>The existing refrigerant requirements are, system performance should not be compromised, refrigerant and lubrication interaction should be as required, it should be energy efficient, environment friendly etc. After Montreal protocol, use of refrigerants like CFC and HCFC banned because of high ozone depleting potential (ODP).</em><em> So there is need to find out a refrigerant which is environment friendly, such as HFC refrigerants as working fluids in refrigeration and air conditioning systems and which can be used long term substitute for existing refrigerants. The most important qualification for refrigerants is low ozone depleting potential (ODP).</em> <em>HFC refrigerants have suitable specifications such as non-flammability, stability, and similar vapour pressure to the refrigerant CFCs and HCFCs and zero ozone depleting potential (ODP) . They are used in many applications with safety of the leakage from the system also with these refrigerants it was found that, there was no need to change in the design of the refrigeration system. So we can look forward to HFC refrigerants. R407C and R507 are HFC refrigerants which are under study.</em>
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".