MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976956143 · doi:10.18280/mmep.060320

Spherical Storage Tank Development Through Mathematical Modeling of Constituent Sections

2019· article· en· W2976956143 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adekunle Taofeek Oyelami, S.O.O. Olusunle

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerospace Engineering and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopment (topology)Petroleum engineeringComputer scienceProcess engineeringEngineeringMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spherical shapes are known to be the ideal theoretical profile for a vessel that resists internal pressure mainly because the tensile stresses developed at the wall of a pressurized spherical vessel is uniform in all directions.This makes a sphere very strong structure and the preferred shape for storing high pressure fluids since it is the only known shape that has no weak points.The major reason why spherical tanks are not commonly used is because of the complexity of the procedure for their development and the associated high cost of production.This work has successfully developed a relatively simplified framework for the design of the constituent sections of a spherical storage tank thereby providing a way out of the difficulty normally associated with its development.The framework developed was validated by using it to design and develop a 225 liter capacity spherical tank.Two models of same capacity were developed and evaluated.The first model was developed through 10section members while the second model used 30-section members.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicAerospace Engineering and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207