Effect of Thermodenuding on the Structure of Nascent Flame Soot Aggregates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The optical properties (absorption and scattering) of soot particles depend on soot size and index of refraction, but also on the soot complex morphology and the internal mixing with materials that can condense on a freshly emitted (nascent) soot particle and coat it. This coating can affect the soot optical properties by refracting light, or by changing the soot aggregate structure. A common approach to studying the effect of coating on soot optical properties is to measure the absorption and scattering coefficients in ambient air, and then measure them again after removing the coating using a thermodenuder. In this approach, it is assumed that: (1) most of the coating material is removed; (2) charred organic coating does not add to the refractory carbon; (3) oxidation of soot is negligible; and, (4) the structure of the pre-existing soot core is left unaltered, despite the potential oxidation of the core at elevated temperatures. In this study, we investigated the validity of the last assumption, by studying the effect of thermodenuding on the morphology of nascent soot. To this end, we analyzed the morphological properties of laboratory generated nascent soot, before and after thermodenuding. Our investigation shows that there is only minor restructuring of nascent soot by thermodenuding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".