MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321359966 · doi:10.24200/sci.2022.59351.6192

Effect of turbulent and laminar flow mechanisms on airflow patterns and CO2 distribution in an operating room: a numerical analysis

2022· article· en· W4321359966 on OpenAlexaff
Vahid Gholami Motlagh, Mohammad Ahmadzadehtalatapeh, Omid Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Iranica · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control and Ventilation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAirflowLaminar flowTurbulenceInletEnvironmental scienceFlow (mathematics)MechanicsRoom air distributionAir quality indexMeteorologyMedicineMarine engineeringMaterials scienceSimulationMechanical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the risk of infection in surgeries, maintaining an acceptable indoor air quality in the operating rooms (ORs) to ensure the health and safety of patients and surgical team is very essential. Since airflow is one of the primary mechanisms for transmitting of infections and pollution, it is crucial to examine the air distribution systems in the ORs. In the present study the effect of turbulent and laminar airflow (TAF/ LAF) systems on the air and CO2 distribution in an OR was examined. The effects of inlet and outlet configurations were evaluated for seven different models. The results indicated that the LAF systems is superior over TAF systems. Based on the findings, the LAF with the air curtain configuration brings about the minimum CO2 concentration level in the OR. The results showed that LAF with the air curtain model is able to decrease the CO2 concentration by about 64.66% and 88.96% on central plane, which passes along the body patient on 1.14 m and 1.7 m above the floor, respectively compared to the existing model.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia IranicaSame topicInfection Control and VentilationFrench-language works237,207