MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311082324 · doi:10.1063/5.0125829

A study of pulsating behavior and stability parameter for one-dimensional non-ideal detonations

2022· article· en· W4311082324 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhuo Xu, Gang Dong, Yang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and Detonation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsExothermic reactionDetonationPhysicsInviscid flowIdeal gasIdeal (ethics)MechanicsThermodynamicsStability (learning theory)Euler equationsClassical mechanicsExplosive materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One-dimensional numerical simulations of non-ideal detonations were performed by using inviscid reactive Euler equations. Chemical reactions in the equations were described by two-step consecutive irreversible reactions A → B → C, which include an exothermic step (A → B) followed by an endothermic step (B → C). Non-ideal detonations are achieved when endothermicity exists in the system. The periodic oscillation behavior of peak pressure during the propagation of a one-dimensional detonation wave was studied with the different exothermicity/endothermicity and different degrees of overdrive. The results show that the increase in exothermicity, the reduction in endothermicity, and the enhanced degrees of overdrive can stabilize the propagation of detonation waves. The influence of the exothermic reaction plays a dominant role for the stability of the one-dimensional non-ideal detonations, which is further confirmed by a theoretical analysis. In addition, the stability parameter χ, proposed originally by Radulescu “The propagation and failure mechanism of gaseous detonations: experiments in porous-walled tubes,” Ph.D. thesis (McGill University, Montreal, Canada, (2003), was extended to predict the stability of non-ideal detonations, based on the Zel'dovich–Neumann–Döring structure of the non-ideal detonations. The results show that the extended stability parameter can well match the stability boundary for all of cases in the present study.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicCombustion and Detonation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207