MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794009984 · doi:10.1007/s00231-018-2313-7

An attempt to make a reliable assessment of the wet steam flow field in the de Laval nozzle

2018· article· en· W2794009984 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHeat and Mass Transfer · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNarodowe Centrum Nauki
KeywordsNozzleComputational fluid dynamicsComputer simulationRocket engine nozzleFlow (mathematics)MechanicsMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the results of research on the wet steam flow with spontaneous condensation in the de Laval nozzle. A comparison is made between the results of numerical modelling performed for two cases of boundary conditions obtained using an in-house CFD code and the Ansys CFX commercial package. The numerical modelling results are compared to the results of experimental testing carried out on an in-house laboratory steam tunnel. The differences between the numerical results produced by the two codes in terms of place and intensity of condensations of steam to water point to the difficulty in correct modelling of this type of flows and emphasize the need for further studies in this field.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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