Karlovitz Numbers and Premixed Turbulent Combustion Regimes for Complex-Chemistry Flames
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structure of premixed turbulent flames and governing physical mechanisms of the influence of turbulence on premixed burning are often discussed by invoking combustion regime diagrams. In the majority of such diagrams, boundaries of three combustion regimes associated with (i) flame preheat zones broadened locally by turbulent eddies, (ii) reaction zones broadened locally by turbulent eddies, and (iii) local extinction are based on a Karlovitz number Ka, with differently defined Ka being used to demarcate different combustion regimes. The present paper aims to overview different definitions of Ka, comparing them, and suggesting the most appropriate choice of Ka for each combustion regime boundary. Moreover, since certain Karlovitz numbers involve a laminar flame thickness, the influence of complex combustion chemistry on the thickness and, hence, on various Ka and relations between them is explored based on results of complex-chemistry simulations of unperturbed (stationary, planar, and one-dimensional) laminar premixed flames, obtained for various fuels, equivalence ratios, pressures, and unburned gas temperatures.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 it