MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W283909062

Investigation of Effectiveness of Emergency Ventilation Strategies in the Event of Fires in Road Tunnels

2005· article· en· W283909062 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ahmed Kashef, Gd Lougheed, Noureddine Bénichou, Alexandre Debs

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational fluid dynamicsMarine engineeringCurrent (fluid)EngineeringVentilation (architecture)SmokeEvent (particle physics)AerodynamicsEnvironmental scienceSimulationMechanical engineeringAerospace engineeringWaste management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A research project is being conducted at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) to evaluate the effectiveness of current emergency ventilation strategies to control smoke spread in the event of a fire in two road tunnels. The research study includes numerical and experimental phases. The numerical phase uses Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) models to study smoke ventilation in the tunnels. The experimental phase is used to calibrate and to partially validate the chosen CFD models and to provide the necessary initial and boundary conditions. SOLVENT, a CFD model, was used to model ventilation scenarios using existing data. The current paper presents the efforts to validate the CFD model against onsite flow and fire test measurements conducted in a 1.8 km road tunnel. The CFD model includes aerodynamically significant physical features of the tunnel and is customized to provide general roughness replicating the actual roughness in the tunnel.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.271
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

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207