MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173596657 · doi:10.4271/2021-01-1162

A Comparative Study on the Ignition Mechanism of Multi-site Ignition and Continuous Discharge Strategy

2021· article· en· W3173596657 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Launch and Propulsion Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgnition systemMechanism (biology)Nuclear engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringAerospace engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Advanced combustion engines dominate all automotive applications. Future high efficiency clean combustion engines can contribute significantly to sustainable transportation. Effective ignition strategies are studied to enable lean and diluted combustion under considerably high-density mixture and strong turbulences, for improving the efficiency and emissions of future combustion engines. Continuous discharge and multi-site ignition strategies have been proved to be effective to stabilize the combustion process under lean and EGR diluted conditions. Continuous discharge strategy uses a traditional sparkplug with a single spark gap and multiple ignition coil packs. The ignition coil packs operate under a specific time offset to realize a continuous discharge process with a prolonged discharge duration. Multi-site ignition strategy also uses multiple ignition coil packs. The ignition coil packs are connected with a specially designed multi-core sparkplug, which has multiple high voltage electrodes to generate multiple flame kernels. The ignition performances of these two ignition strategies differ from each other because of the distinguished ignition mechanisms. In this paper, the ignition mechanisms of both ignition strategies are investigated empirically via constant volume combustion vessel and a single-cylinder research engine. Test results indicate that the multi-site ignition strategy outperforms the continuous discharge strategy under quiescent and less intensified flow conditions, because of the larger initial flame kernel size. The efficacy of the multi-site ignition strategy relies highly on the survivability of the multiple initial flame kernels. Under extreme lean conditions with intensified flow field, a continuous discharge with long discharge duration can secure the flame kernel initiation process more effectively.</div></div>

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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