MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612590432 · doi:10.1115/1.4036689

Similarity Criteria for Modeling Mixed-Convection Heat Transfer in Ducted Flows of Supercritical Fluids

2017· article· en· W2612590432 on OpenAlexafffund
Chukwudi Azih, M. I. Yaras

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Heat Transfer · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat transfer and supercritical fluids
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSupercritical fluidHeat transferConvectionFluid dynamicsSimilarity (geometry)Forced convectionMechanicsConvective heat transferCombined forced and natural convectionThermodynamicsSimilarity solutionNatural convectionComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key subject of interest for technologies that involve flows of fluids at the supercritical thermodynamic state is the development of prediction methods that capture the fluid dynamics and convection heat transfer at this state. Due to the elevated temperatures and pressures associated with certain working fluids at this thermodynamic state, surrogate fluids are often used as substitutes for performing experiments during the design stages of prototype development. The success of this approach depends on the development of similarity criteria or fluid-to-fluid models. Similarity criteria for mixed-convection heat transfer in supercritical fluids are proposed based on a set of nondimensional dynamic similarity parameters and state-space parameters developed through our current understanding of the physical mechanisms that affect heat transfer in fluids at this state. The proposed similarity criteria are successfully validated using data from ducted flows of supercritical fluids with configurations having upstream, downstream, or wall-normal-oriented gravitational acceleration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Heat TransferSame topicHeat transfer and supercritical fluidsFrench-language works237,207