Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Separation by density difference, compaction, and drainage is presented, along with formulas developed for bottle centrifuges, solid wall centrifuges, disk centrifuges, and hydrocyclones. The Σ‐concept development and several practical variants are discussed. Liquid–liquid separation interface location formulas are reviewed. An updated performance chart for selection and design is provided. Models for centrifuge energy consumption based on Σ‐concept are discussed. Centrifuge components, including a breakdown of power and energy losses with applicable information for centrifuges, are represented. Centrifuge materials of construction and their corrosion, erosion, and strength characteristics are reviewed. Stresses generated owing to rotation and process materials, abrasion resistance, and noise generated by centrifuges are discussed. The various types of sedimentation and filtration equipment are reviewed. Examples of use, rates, and performance of bottle; disk; decanter; preparation; zonal; tubular; perforated basket; inverting filter; conical; and continuous single‐ and multistage pusher centrifuges are reviewed. For a brief discussion of gas centrifuges and their use in uranium enrichment, please see the previous editions.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".