MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366442042 · doi:10.32920/22658476.v1

Effects Of Additives, Fuel Mixing, And Mechanically Induced Oscillations On Soot Formation

2023· preprint· en· W4366442042 on OpenAlexaff
Marek Serwin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSootOxygenCombustionEthyleneChemistryParticulatesOxygenateCarbon fibersMixing (physics)Limiting oxygen concentrationChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceOrganic chemistryCatalysisComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Soot is a component of particulate matter (PM) as a bi-product of the combustion process of carbon-based fuels. In this thesis a new optical diagnostic technique for temperature measurements is developed. The effects of soot formation as a cause of fuel additives such as oxygen as well as fuel mixtures of ethylene, ethanol, DME and ethane are evaluated experimentally. Additionally, a novel experimental setup, designed to study the effects mechanical oscillations have on soot formation and temperature, is described and presented alongside experimental results for ethylene flames.</p> <p>Three distinct projects were completed as part of this thesis: (i) Various oxygenated flames and the effect of molecular and additive oxygen on soot formation was studied. (ii) A sudden decrease in soot concentration with oxygen addition was observed and this soot reversal effect due molecular oxygen addition was studied. (iii) A novel experimental setup was developed to study mechanically oscillating flame. Soot concentration and temperature were measured for various oscillation amplitudes and frequencies. The findings of this thesis show synergistic effects of soot production with oxygen addition and the effects of oscillations on soot formation.</p>

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207