MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393952730 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-56906-5

Quantifying the chemical activity of cavitation bubbles in a cluster

2024· article· en· W4393952730 on OpenAlexafffund
Kobra Fattahi, Daria C. Boffito, Étienne Robert

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicUltrasound and Cavitation Phenomena
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBubbleCavitationCluster (spacecraft)Chemical energyEnergy transformationMechanicsHydrophoneMaterials scienceChemical processLaserChemical reactionChemical physicsAtomic physicsOpticsPhysicsChemistryAcousticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Acoustic cavitation bubbles drive chemical processes through their dynamic lifecycle in liquids. These bubbles are abundant within sonoreactors, where their behavior becomes complex within clusters. This study quantifies their chemical effects within well-defined clusters using a new laser-based method. We focus a laser beam into water, inducing a breakdown that generates a single cavitation bubble. This bubble undergoes multiple collapses, releasing several shockwaves. These shockwaves propagate into the surrounding medium, leading to the formation of secondary bubbles near a reflector, separated from the input laser beam. We evaluate the chemical activity of these bubble clusters of various sizes by KI dosimetry, and to gain insights into their dynamics, we employ high-speed imaging. Hydrophone measurements show that conversion from focused shockwave energy to chemical reactions increases to a maximum of 16.5%. Additional increases in shockwave energy result in denser bubble clusters and a slightly decreased conversion rate, falling to 14.9%, highlighting the key role of bubble dynamics in the transformation of mechanical to chemical energy and as a result in the efficiency of the sonoreactors. The size and frequency of bubble collapses influence the cluster’s chemical reactivity. We introduce a correlation for predicting the conversion rate of cluster energy to chemical energy, based on the cluster’s energy density. The maximum conversion rate occurs at a cluster energy density of 2500 J/L, linked to a cluster with an average bubble diameter of 91 $$\upmu$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mi>μ</mml:mi> </mml:math> m, a bubble density of 3500 bubbles/ml, and a bubble-to-bubble distance ratio of 8.

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)0.002
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicUltrasound and Cavitation PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207