MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908944086 · doi:10.1002/er.4360

Experimental measurements and numerical computation of nanofluid and microencapsulated phase change material in porous material

2019· article· en· W2908944086 on OpenAlexaff
M. Ziad Saghir, Ayman M. Bayomy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Energy Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanofluidMaterials sciencePhase-change materialThermal energy storageTernary operationPhase changeThermal conductivityPorosityPorous mediumThermodynamicsEnergy storageChemical engineeringComposite materialNanotechnologyNanoparticle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electronic industry is increasingly investigating different approaches for the cooling of electronic equipment. The use of bulk phase change materials is also a promising approach for energy storage. The introduction of microencapsulated phase change materials combined with nanofluids can be beneficial. The combined use of a nanofluid and a metallic porous material can be used to mitigate problems resulting from small thermal conductivity. This study investigated a ternary mixture of water with a nanofluid and a microencapsulated phase change material in a porous medium. The model was previously validated with experimental data using a 0.5%vol concentration nanofluid in water. The results revealed that heat storage capability can be achieved as long as the microencapsulated phase change materials, which consists of encapsulated eicosane, is at a concentration of 20%. Because the melting temperature of microencapsulated phase change materials is approximately 36°C, energy storage at a low flow rate and heat flux is recommended.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Energy ResearchSame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207