MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751584981 · doi:10.7901/2169-3358-2017.1.1194

PREDICTION OF OIL DROPLET MOVEMENT AND SIZE DISTRIBUTION: LAGRANGIAN METHOD AND VDROP-J MODEL

2017· article· en· W2751584981 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Gao, Lin Zhao, Frank Shaffer, Roozbeh Golshan, Michel C. Boufadel, Thomas King, Brian Robinson, Kenneth Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Oil Spill Conference Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsBuoyancyOil dropletLift (data mining)Lagrangian particle trackingDragNeutral buoyancyTrajectoryLagrangianPlumePhysicsMeteorologyChemistryComputational fluid dynamicsComputer scienceEmulsion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT (2017-306): During subsurface oil releases, oil disperses into droplets whose trajectories depend on the droplet size. We report the measurements of the droplet size distribution (DSD) obtained from the release of diesel at 135 GPM from a horizontal pipe in the Ohmsett tank. The DSD was predicted using the model VDROP-J and matched the observation. Subsequently, the movement of the droplets was tracked using a Lagrangian Particle Tracking (LPT) approach. Various forces affecting the migration of the droplets were considered, these include drag, buoyancy, lift, and added mass force. It was found that the lift force is negligible. The added mass force was negligible for droplets smaller than 500 μm. Visual observation and modeling indicated that large droplets (larger than 300 μm) tend to separate from the plume and migrate upward independently, which affects, not only the DSD of large droplets but also the resulting daughter droplets. This is an issue that has not been addressed in the literature. Our findings indicate that the DSD is needed to better predict the trajectory of oil blowouts.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Oil Spill Conference ProceedingsSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207