A mechanistic model for gas–liquid mass transfer prediction in a rocking disposable bioreactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rocking disposable bioreactors are a newer approach to smaller‐scale cell growth that use a cyclic rocking motion to induce mixing and oxygen transfer from the headspace gas into the liquid. Compared with traditional stirred‐tank and pneumatic bioreactors, rocking bioreactors operate in a very different physical mode and in this study the oxygen transfer pathways are reassessed to develop a fundamental mass transfer ( k L a ) model that is compared with experimental data. The model combines two mechanisms, namely surface aeration and oxygenation via a breaking wave with air entrainment, borrowing concepts from ocean wave models. Experimental data for across the range of possible operating conditions (rocking speed, angle, and liquid volume) confirms the validity of the modeling approach, with most predictions falling within ±20% of the experimental values. At low speeds (up to 20 rpm) the surface aeration mechanism is shown to be dominant with a of around 3.5 hr −1 , while at high speeds (40 rpm) and angles the breaking wave mechanism contributes up to 91% of the overall (65 hr −1 ). This model provides an improved fundamental basis for understanding gas–liquid mass transfer for the operation, scale‐up, and potential design improvements for rocking bioreactors.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".