MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3018283962 · doi:10.1080/02786826.2020.1758623

Development and validation of a multi-angle light scattering method for fast engine soot mass and size measurements

2020· article· en· W3018283962 on OpenAlexaff
Pooyan Kheirkhah, Alberto Baldelli, Patrick Kirchen, Steven N. Rogak

Bibliographic record

VenueAerosol Science and Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSootScatteringLight scatteringOpticsParticle sizeRayleigh scatteringMass concentration (chemistry)AerosolNephelometerMaterials scienceComputational physicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Refractive indexChemistryPhysicsCombustionThermodynamicsMeteorologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Fast Exhaust Nephelometer (FEN) is developed for light scattering measurement of particles produced by unsteady combustion processes, such as in diesel engines. The FEN simultaneously measures the light scattering intensity at three angles to infer the mass concentration (<i>C</i><sub>m</sub>), the geometric mass mean mobility diameter (<i>d</i><sub>m,g</sub>), and the geometric standard deviation (<i>σ</i><sub>m,g</sub>) of polydisperse soot. A kernel is used to determine <i>C</i><sub>m</sub>, <i>d</i><sub>m,g</sub>, and <i>σ</i><sub>m,g</sub> based on lookup tables generated with the Rayleigh-Debye-Gans light scattering model for fractal aggregates (RDGFA); the model incorporates the variation of the primary particle size (<i>d</i><sub>p</sub>) with aggregate size (<i>d</i><sub>a</sub>), and nine parameters related to the soot properties, and one to the FEN optics. These parameters are determined a priori from literature and Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). The inverted <i>C</i><sub>m</sub> and <i>d</i><sub>m,g</sub> are within ±10% of the gravimetric mass concentration and SMPS mobility diameter. This, however, largely depends on the choice of the parameters used to generate the lookup tables. A parametric study shows the inferred mass is most sensitive to uncertainties in the soot refractive index, the primary particle size, and the fractal pre-factor <i>k</i><sub>f</sub>. Considering the wide range of soot refractive indices in the literature and the sensitivity of the morphological parameters to the processing of soot images, the uncertainty in mass concentration would be over 40%. Because of this, a novel approach of relating the size of primary particles to the size of aggregates is incorporated for the first time in the light scattering model, and reduces the uncertainty to ±25–30%. Copyright © 2020 American Association for Aerosol Research

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAerosol Science and TechnologySame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207