MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984705749 · doi:10.1115/pvp2019-94043

Ratcheting due to Thermal Stratification

2019· article· en· W2984705749 on OpenAlexaff
R. Adibi-Asl, Debra O'Kane, E. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueVolume 1: Codes and Standards · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPipingFinite element methodThermal stratificationRatchetThermalStratification (seeds)EnclosureEngineeringMechanicsMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringTurbulencePhysicsThermodynamicsElectrical engineeringWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thermal ratcheting is required to be checked by most of the piping design codes, specifically the ASME B&PV Code. For cases where the variation of temperature distribution is not uniform, the existing ratchet check methodology for piping is inadequate and therefore the finite element analysis (FEA) is often used to perform ratchet checks. Thermal stratification, in which cold and hot fluid flows are layered in a relatively steady state condition, is a good example of non-linear/non-uniform temperature distribution across the pipe. This paper develops straightforward equations to address thermal stratification in piping. Finite element analysis is used to benchmark the results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVolume 1: Codes and StandardsSame topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207