MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388441149 · doi:10.1142/s0217984924501008

A CPC fractional model of the heat and mass transport mechanism in Carbon nanotubes with slip effects on velocity

2023· article· en· W4388441149 on OpenAlexaff
Shajar Abbas, Mudassar Nazar, Syeda Farzeen Fatima Gillani, Muhammad Riaz Naveed, Mushtaq Ahmad, Zaib Un Nisa

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Physics Letters B · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofluid Flow and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaplace transformDimensionless quantityMaterials scienceMechanicsBoundary value problemNanofluidCarbon nanotubeMass transferFractional calculusPhysicsClassical mechanicsHeat transferMathematical analysisComposite materialMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fractional technique is used to evaluate the temperature, mass, and velocity flow of single and double wall CNTs over a vertical plate. Slip boundary conditions and applied magnetic force are addressed. Human blood is used to examine how base fluid behaves. Applying the proper dimensionless variables results in the dimensionless formulation of initial and boundary conditions related to the governed dimensional concentration, momentum, and energy equations. The Laplace transform technique is used to resolve the dimensionless governing partial differential equations and get the solutions. The constant proportional Caputo (CPC) time-fractional derivative is a unique class of fractional model used in the simulation technique. The fundamental definitions are used to support the said model first. Using MWCNTs and SWCNTs in comparison to the flow characteristics, a thermal and mass study is given. The heat and mass transfer processes for single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) have been shown to typically be progressive. The momentum profile decreases as the fractional variables rise. Multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) show more progressive velocity control as a result of the magnetic parameter. Graphs demonstrate the influence of embedding factors on the velocity, energy, and concentration profiles.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Physics Letters BSame topicNanofluid Flow and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207