Exploring Soot Inception With Stochastic Modelling, Machine Learning, and CFD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Soot particle emissions are known to have a host of negative climate and health effects and the reduction of their emission is a foremost concern. Soot formation in flames is a complex physical and chemical process. One of the least understood steps in the soot formation process is soot inception, the initial transition from gaseous flame molecules to solid soot particles. An incomplete understanding of soot inception has hindered modelling efforts and, subsequently, the ability to reduce soot emissions. Due in part to the complexity of flame chemistry, many current numerical inception models do not fully capture important nuances in the formation of soot precursors and thus in the formation of soot itself. The goals of this thesis are to begin integrating two existing combustion simulation tools called CoFlame and SNapS2, to create an improved predictive model for inception using machine learning, and to provide detailed descriptions of the properties of soot precursors in order to inform the development of accurate and generalized future numerical inception models. This thesis is divided into two studies. The first study describes the development of a novel machine learning-based inception prediction tool that combines the existing simulation codes CoFlame and SNapS2. The second study uses the SNapS2 code to provide detailed characterizations of the gaseous flame species that contribute to soot inception.</p>
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".