“Parametric study on the age of air in a full-scale office room using perforated duct diffusers.”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the recent pandemic of COVID-19, scientists have made many efforts to devise a workable solution for it, worldwide. However, it was shown that the protective effect of a well-conditioning system is as high as five times in comparison to the face-covering and other proposed procedures. In this context, the age of air and the type of filtration systems in closed spaces became the critical criteria for comparing the capability of ventilation systems. In this paper, a validated numerical model for the perforated duct diffusers is used to study the behaviour of the local age of air at the full-scale office with 8 feet (2.44 [m]) height, under various initial conditions like initial velocity and air change per hour. Also, different geometries for the ducts have been investigated under the same initial condition, as well as the effect of direction, ventilation effectiveness, and flow pattern. Finally, the volume average of the age of air at different zones has been nominated to perform the sensitivity analysis of each variable based on the variation of the airflow. The results show that diffusers with vertical perforations would be more effective during the pandemic than the other types in airborne mitigation. Moreover, the highest available airflow shall be set until such time there is no windy area in the breathing zone. Within these modifications, the residence time of the infectious nuclei in the breathing zone may decrease by up to 30%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".