MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189013827 · doi:10.1177/03064190211034165

An improved de Laval nozzle experiment

2021· article· en· W3189013827 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExperimental Learning in Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleIsentropic processShock (circulatory)Compressible flowRocket engine nozzleMechanicsFlow visualizationCompressibilityComputer scienceDuct (anatomy)Flow (mathematics)SimulationPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exposing students to hands-on experiments has been a common approach to illustrating complex physical phenomena that have been otherwise modelled solely mathematically. Compressible, isentropic flow in a duct is an example of such a phenomenon, and it is often demonstrated via a de Laval nozzle experiment. We have improved an existing converging/diverging nozzle experiment so that students can modify the location of the normal shock that develops in the diverging portion to better understand the relationship between the shock and the pressure. We have also improved the data acquisition system for this experiment and explained how visualisation of the standing shock is now possible. The results of the updated system demonstrate that the accuracy of the isentropic flow characteristics has not been lost. Through pre- and post-laboratory quizzes, we show the impact on student learning as well.

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 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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.262 · 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