MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402084240 · doi:10.1016/j.cis.2024.103299

Non-Newtonian behaviour of suspensions and emulsions: Review of different mechanisms

2024· review· en· W4402084240 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Colloid and Interface Science · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRheologyNewtonian fluidNon-Newtonian fluidMaterials scienceGeneralized Newtonian fluidMechanicsPhysicsShear rateComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanisms of non-Newtonian behaviour of suspensions and emulsions in steady shear flow are reviewed. The review is divided into two parts. In the first part, the mechanisms of non-Newtonian behaviour in suspensions and emulsions composed of Newtonian matrix are reviewed. Both dilute and concentrated systems are discussed. In the second part, the mechanisms of non-Newtonian behaviour in suspensions and emulsions composed of non-Newtonian matrix are reviewed . Where appropriate, mathematical models describing the rheology are included. • The mechanisms for non-Newtonian behaviour in suspensions and emulsions are reviewed. • Dilute, concentrated, and highly concentrated systems are considered. • Suspensions and emulsions with Newtonian and non-Newtonian matrices are reviewed. • Shear-thinning, shear-thickening, and yield stress in suspensions and emulsions are discussed and explained.

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.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.404
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.326 · 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