Morphology and Raman spectra of aerodynamically classified soot samples
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Airborne soot is emitted from combustion processes as aggregates of primary particles. The size of the primary particles and the overall aggregate size control soot transport properties, and prior research shows that these parameters may be related to the soot nanostructure. In this work, a laminar, inverted nonpremixed burner has been used as a source of soot that is almost completely elemental carbon. The inverted burner was connected to an electrical low-pressure impactor, which collected particles on stages according to the aerodynamic diameter, from 0.03 to 10 µm. The morphology was analyzed using a transmission electron microscope followed by image processing to extract projected area and average primary particle size for each aggregate (approximately 1000 aggregates analyzed in total for the nine impactor stages). Carbon nanostructure was analyzed using a Raman spectrometer, and five vibrational bands (D4, D1, D3, G, and D2) were fitted to the spectra to obtain an estimate of the carbon disorder. The average primary particle diameter increases from 15 to 30 nm as the impactor stage aerodynamic diameter increases. The D1, D3, D2, and D4 bands decreased (relative to the G band) with the particle size, suggesting that the larger aggregates have larger graphitic domains.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it