MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026699804 · doi:10.3390/en13102665

Forced Convection in Porous Media Using Al2O3 and TiO2 Nanofluids in Differing Base Fluids

2020· article· en· W3026699804 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Ziad Saghir, Christopher Welsford

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsNanofluidNusselt numberEthylene glycolMaterials scienceMechanicsHeat transferForced convectionWork (physics)ThermodynamicsPorous mediumBase (topology)PorosityChemical engineeringComposite materialReynolds numberMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following work presents a numerical evaluation of the use of TiO2 and Al2O3 nanofluids operating with ethylene glycol and water as base fluids—as well as an experimental evaluation of Al2O3-water nanofluid. Both numerical and experimental systems were tested and operated under various flow and heat transfer conditions, including four flow rates and three heat fluxes. When compared, the numerical schemes and experimental results showed deviation of under two degrees Celsius. This led the authors to conclude that the numerical scheme accurately reflected the experimental conditions. When all combinations of mixtures were compared numerically, it was found that ethylene glycol provided the highest average Nusselt number, while water offered significantly lower pumping requirements. When comparing nanoparticles, it was found that, in a carrying-fluid of water, TiO2 had superior performance by approximately one percent.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207