MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159004028 · doi:10.1002/cjce.24144

Multi‐scale modelling of monolith reactors: A 30‐year perspective from 1990 to 2020

2021· article· en· W3159004028 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Robert E. Hayes, Iván Cornejo

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonolithContext (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Scale (ratio)Computer scienceAutomotive industryEnvironmental scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineeringPhysicsChemistryGeologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The honeycomb type monolith reactor dominates the field of catalytic automotive exhaust gas after treatment systems and is increasingly being used in other applications. Advanced computational modelling of such systems can provide valuable insight into their operating characteristics and be used as a design tool. This reactor provides an excellent example of a multi‐scale modelling challenge with many complexities. This paper provides a perspective on the development and use of computational modelling tools in this context over the last 30 years, with an emphasis on the work published by the researchers at the University of Alberta. This paper covers all aspects of model development, including single channel and full‐scale reactor models and inter and intra mass and heat transfer effects, with the latter including radiation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207