Evaluation of Compressor Reliability for HFO Refrigerants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responses to an international flamework on climate change, such as the Kigali Agreement in 2016, have been discussed in an industrial field. The phase down regulation of CFC and HCFC refrigerant has been discussed and performed under the Montreal Protocol for refrigerants from the viewpoint of ozone layer protection. From the viewpoint of preventing global warming, HFC reduction plans are currently being proposed by North America, Europe, India, etc. within the framework of the Protocol. A developing country where the phase-out of CFCs and HCFCs began in 2013, are growing trend to switch to HFC or HFO mixed refrigerants with lower GWP than R410A. A revision of the regulations related to HFC are also being promoted in each region. The GWP upper limit for each equipment application was set together with the HFC phase down in Europe which due to the F-gas regulations. R32, HFO refrigerants such as R1234yf and R1234ze, or a mixed refrigerant of HFC and HFO are proposed as candidates for low GWP refrigerants. The problem of R32 was the higher discharge gas temperature than R410A, but the problem could be solved by temperature control and suitable refrigeration oil. On the other hand, the problem of refrigerants HFO and mixed HFO is easy to decompose than HFC. When HFO is decompose, it is generated acid such as fluorinated acid and trifluoroacetic acid. These acids make which is reduced the compressor reliability. We selected of suitable refrigeration oil and materials for the HFO and confirmed the compressor reliability
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".