MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088824206 · doi:10.1177/1468087420953085

Future gasoline engine ignition: A review on advanced concepts

2020· review· en· W3088824206 on OpenAlexafffund
Shui Yu, Ming Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Engine Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlasma Applications and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsIgnition systemHomogeneous charge compression ignitionCombustionSPARK (programming language)Automotive engineeringLaser ignitionGasolineIgnition timingMinimum ignition energyPetrol engineNuclear engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceCombustion chamberInternal combustion engineEngineeringAerospace engineeringWaste managementChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To meet the future requirements of fuel economy and exhaust emissions, high-efficiency gasoline engines tend to employ diluted combustion concepts along with intensified charge motion and stratified mixtures. Securing the ignition of such mixtures over the full engine operation range is challenging, because of the lowered mixture reactivity and increased discrepancy of stoichiometry. In recent years, increasing research efforts have been spending on innovations of ignition technologies to tackle the challenges. In this paper, the directions of ignition improvement are highlighted based on the fundamental understanding of the ignition mechanisms. The working principles of the primary types of advanced ignition systems are introduced; and relevant engine and combustion vessel test results are reviewed. The ignition systems are categorized as: (1) high-energy spark ignition, (2) pulsed nanosecond discharge ignition, (3) radio-frequency plasma ignition, (4) laser-induced plasma ignition, and (5) pre-chamber ignition. The advanced ignition systems are commented, regarding the ignition effectiveness and the implementation challenges, according to the literatures and the extensive empirical work at the authors’ laboratory.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.406 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations63
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Engine ResearchSame topicPlasma Applications and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207