On modelling of surface tension of <scp> CMC‐α‐Fe <sub>2</sub> O <sub>3</sub> </scp> nanoparticles by fuzzy‐hybrid approach: A comparison study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Surface tension is one of the most important rheological parameters of nanoliquids. It influences the thermophysical and mass transfer properties of nanostructures. Accurate estimation of the surface tension from operating variables is critical for determining optimal production processes. However, the challenges of producing nanoparticles and measuring their properties introduce experimental errors in the data used for mathematical modelling. Crisp regression approaches provide adequate representation of the data, but they do not provide information about the experimental uncertainty. In this study, a fuzzy‐hybrid approach is proposed for mathematical modelling of surface tension of carboxymethyl cellulose/chitosan‐α‐Fe 2 O 3 nanoparticles. Then, the proposed model is compared with a crisp model from a previous study. Error analysis is conducted to validate the constructed fuzzy model. It is observed that the fuzzy‐hybrid modelling approach has yielded significantly lower error values (a 60%–90% improvement in all error metrics on average), and thus, it is superior to the crisp approach. This study contributes to the subject of modelling rheological properties. It is shown that the fuzzy‐hybrid approach has impressive potential to be utilized for modelling the rheological properties of nanostructures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".