MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3096235485 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23908

Experimental investigation on the microstructure of fluidized nanoparticle agglomerates by <scp>TEM</scp> image analysis

2020· article· en· W3096235485 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shaowei Wang, Huanpeng Liu, Chenyu Yang, Li Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgglomerateMaterials scienceTransmission electron microscopyMicrostructureNanometreNanoparticleFractal dimensionChemical engineeringPorosityNanotechnologyComposite materialFractal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, the hierarchical solid structures and multiscale pore structures inside fluidized nanoparticle agglomerates (FNPAs) are qualitatively revealed in the transmission electron microscope (TEM) images of ultrathin slices of solidified FNPAs from the bottom of the bed. The micromorphology of aggregates and simple agglomerates, the porosities of pores intra and inter simple agglomerates, and pore size distributions inside FNPAs are quantitatively analyzed by image analysis. The average fractal dimensions of aggregates of about 300 nm‐1000 nm and simple agglomerates of several micrometres are around 1.9 and 2.6 respectively. The pore structure of FNPAs is complex and heterogeneous and displays a multiscale feature. Nearly 50% of the pores intra simple agglomerates have sizes of tens of nanometers and more than half the pores between simple agglomerates are of micrometre scale. The porosities of the pores intra and inter simple agglomerates are about 0.82 and 0.85 respectively.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering→Same topicGranular flow and fluidized beds→French-language works237,207→