MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318260053 · doi:10.1002/9783527835348.ch8

Nanothermites: Developments and Future Perspectives

2023· other· en· W4318260053 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Fahd, Charles Dubois, Jamal Chaouki, John Z. Wen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTernary operationOxideGrapheneCombustionMaterials scienceNanomaterialsNanotechnologyCarbon fibersCarbon nanotubeMetalComputer scienceChemistryMetallurgyComposite materialComposite numberOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ternary nanothermites are considered promising energetic materials and a key option to meet the increasing demand in the field of energetic and propulsion systems. The first part of this chapter outlines the advantages of using nanothermites over microthermites. Traditional composites of nanothermites based on n-Al and metallic oxides are described. Furthermore, efforts to improve the combustion characteristics of basic nanothermites mixtures are summarized. In the second part of the chapter, we introduce the benefits of using oxygenated salts as alternative oxidizers to metallic ones in enhancing the energetic properties of nanothermites. The impact of different carbon nanomaterials (graphene oxide, reduced graphene oxide, carbon nanotubes, and carbon nanofibers) on the combustion behavior of ternary nanothermites is discussed. Another focus is on the proper use of ternary nanothermites in micro-energetic devices. For this purpose, tuning the proportion of the oxidizer and fuel in ternary nanothermites is an important issue. In addition, the combustion propagation process, pressure, and thrust generating characteristics of ternary nanothermite mixtures in small tubes are examined.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.174 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207