Influence of the chemical kinetics on the prediction of turbulent non-premixed jet CH$$_4$$ flames
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present work focuses on the five different chemical mechanisms coupled with probability density function (PDF) model to represent the local extinction and re-ignition flame characteristics of the well-known Sandia Flames D–F. These five mechanisms span from the Foundational Fuel Chemistry Model (FFCM) mechanism involving 38 species to the Glarborg mechanism involving 150 species. The coupled computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and transported-PDF method are used for the turbulence modeling, and the reaction–diffusion manifolds (REDIMs) are used as an advanced technique for the simplification of chemical kinetics and to speed up the numerical computation. It is demonstrated that these chemical mechanisms have an ability to represent the degree of local extinction and re-ignition accurately. Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis shows that the degree of local extinction is very sensitive to only several key elementary reactions, and an analysis on the turbulence–chemistry interaction investigates the influence of these elementary reactions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".