MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193337379 · doi:10.1002/prs.12298

Living with oversized <scp>spring‐loaded</scp> vapor relief valves

2021· article· en· W3193337379 on OpenAlexaff
Dustin Smith, K. Paul

Bibliographic record

VenueProcess Safety Progress · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicEngineering and Material Science Research
Canadian institutionsSmiths Detection (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelief valveOverpressureSymptom reliefStress reliefFull serviceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringPoor reliefForensic engineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceBusinessMedicineSurgeryPhysicsLawComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pressure relief valves are installed on pressurized systems to mitigate consequences related to excessive pressure. Since relief valves come in discrete sizes, a relief system designer specifies a relief device with a rated capacity greater than the largest required relief rate. An oversized relief device is one in which a credible overpressure scenario exists; that is, the relief device capacity is more than a multiple (typically five times) the scenario's required relief rate. Most systems have more than one credible overpressure scenario (e.g., external fire or blocked outlet). In some other cases, installations in vapor service have been identified with an oversized relief device concern, without verification of whether or not these installations have a history of instability‐related damage (e.g., excessive relief device damage). Typically damage from oversized vapor relief devices is less severe than chatter which is caused by the coupling of the inlet line and the relief device, not the flow through the relief device. Some owners/operators have specified that oversized relief devices require mitigation. However, this paper shows why an oversized relief device in vapor service may not require mitigation.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcess Safety ProgressSame topicEngineering and Material Science ResearchFrench-language works237,207