MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379382722 · doi:10.1515/cppm-2023-0026

Predicting buoyant jet characteristics: a machine learning approach

2023· article· en· W4379382722 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossein Hassanzadeh, Saptarshi Joshi, Seyed Mohammad Taghavi

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Product and Process Modeling · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationMitacsCanada Research ChairsPetroleum Technology Alliance CanadaUniversité Laval
KeywordsRandom forestSupport vector machineJet (fluid)Artificial neural networkRange (aeronautics)Laminar flowArtificial intelligenceReynolds numberComputer scienceMachine learningRegressionAlgorithmMathematicsPhysicsStatisticsMechanicsEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study positively buoyant miscible jets through high-speed imaging and planar laser-induced fluorescence methods, and we rely on supervised machine learning techniques to predict jet characteristics. These include, in particular, predictions to the laminar length and spread angle, over a wide range of Reynolds and Archimedes numbers. To make these predictions, we use linear regression, support vector regression, random forests, K-nearest neighbour, and artificial neural network algorithms. We evaluate the performance of the aforementioned models using various standard metrics, finding that the random forest algorithm is the best for predicting our jet characteristics. We also discover that this algorithm outperforms a recent empirical correlation, resulting in a significant increase in accuracy, especially for predicting the laminar length.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Product and Process ModelingSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207