MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407397267 · doi:10.2514/6.2025-2803

Prediction of Droplet Statistics in Sprays Using Deep Neural Networks

2025· article· en· W4407397267 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Broumand, Sean Yun

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Surface Properties and Treatments
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkComputer scienceStatisticsDeep neural networksArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting droplet statistics in sprays is essential for improving efficiency, minimizing losses, and enhancing reliability in various propulsion and power systems and associated subsystems. However, accurately and efficiently predicting the random behavior of spray droplets in practical applications remains challenging due to their large numbers and diverse characteristics. Design-stage estimations often fail to capture operational changes, while unplanned variations in system conditions and injector wear and/or partial clogging can negatively impact spray performance. Nonetheless, advances in industrial digitalization—such as digital twins and AI/machine learning (ML)—offer transformative opportunities for the development of intelligent systems. In this context, the present study demonstrates the development of a multi-output deep neural network (DNN) for the simultaneous prediction of the size and velocity of spray droplets. Such data-driven models can be directly employed in edge-computing devices for real-time control and fault diagnostics in high-precision spray systems. Additionally, they can be integrated with physics-based models to develop digital twins for spray systems. Their predictions can be assimilated into Lagrangian particle tracking simulations to enable the numerical analysis and design optimization of spray systems without the need for resolving the complete range of spatiotemporal scales involved in the high-fidelity simulation of the breakup/atomization of liquid jets and sheets.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Surface Properties and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207