MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391550746 · doi:10.1115/imece2023-112575

Development of Modified Perturbation Solutions to the One-Phase Stefan Problems With a Convective Boundary

2023· article· en· W4391550746 on OpenAlexaff
Minghan Xu, Mohammaderfan Mohit, Saad Akhtar, Agus P. Sasmito

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvectionPerturbation (astronomy)Stefan problemBoundary (topology)MechanicsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematicsCalculus (dental)Mathematical analysisPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The classical Stefan problem is used to track the moving solid-liquid interface during the freezing process. Perturbation theory has often been applied to find an approximate analytical solution due to the nonlinearity of the moving interface. However, the Stefan number (i.e., the sensible over latent heat) must be small and usually less than 0.01 to assume the perturbation expansion, which in turn limits the thermal engineering applications. In this study, a modified perturbation solution is developed by adding a correction term after the leading-order solution to be valid for a much wider range of Stefan numbers (i.e., 0.01 ≤ Ste ≤ 1). Specifically, a one-phase Stefan problem is first formulated subjected to a convective boundary in the Cartesian, cylindrical, and spherical coordinate systems for inward solidification. The leading-order solution is calculated based on the regular perturbation theory, while the correction term is obtained using the Monte-Carlo method and a multi-variant regression. Results show that the correction term has a linear relationship with the Stefan number and is not significantly influenced by the Biot number. The proposed modified perturbation solution can accurately and rapidly predict the nonlinear moving interface motion for the freezing process.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207