Design and evaluation of a Laval-type supersonic atomizer for low-pressure gas atomization of molten metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laval 类型超声的煤气的 atomizer 为熔融的金属的低压的煤气的粉碎成原子被设计。主要设计目的是由改进煤气的入口和插头结构并且优化结构的参数在更低的操作压力生产小粒子的一致粉末。一个计算液体流动模型被开发学习设计 atomizer 的流动领域特征。模拟结果证明在粉碎成原子地区的最大的煤气的速度能到达 440 m 敭楲慺楴湯瀠潲畤瑣 ? 敷敲挠慨慲瑣牥穩摥戠 ? 敭档湡捩污琠獥楴杮? 諟熻鷸 { 攠敬瑣潲 ? 業牣獯潣祰 ???? 湥牥祧搭獩数獲癩?? 慲? 灳 ' 虪光礉樀???? 湡 ?? 慲? 楤晦慲瑣潩 ? 堨吗？？
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".