MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409749052 · doi:10.1002/ese3.70110

End‐To‐End Deep Learning Temperature Prediction Algorithms of a Phase Change Materials From Experimental Photos

2025· article· en· W4409749052 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Hassan Ranjbar, Kobra Gharali, Artie W. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Science & Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Change Materials Research
Canadian institutionsBalsillie School of International AffairsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmPhase changeArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer scienceEngineering physicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT A Phase‐change material (PCM) experiences irregular shape and nonlinear temperature changes at different locations during the melting process; these parameters provide valuable information on the characteristics of the PCM. Traditional explicit image processing, statistics, and mathematical techniques may be used to estimate the temperature of the PCM photos, but these methods have limitations such as high inaccuracy, no generalization, and complexity. Here, temperatures at different locations inside the PCM have been calculated by using the shape of melting PCM with the aid of deep learning. An experimental setup was built to melt the PCM under constant wall temperature and a conventional digital camera took temporal photos of the phase change. Four end‐to‐end networks have been developed to use the captured photos as input and report temperatures of the PCM as output. Initially, the networks were built using different convolutional layers and weights for feature extraction, and then the fully connected layers extracted the temperature profiles of the PCM. Comparison of the networks shows that MobileNets based Weights IV – Deep Neural Network (WIV‐ DNN) detects the temperature at different locations of the PCM successfully with an average error of less than 0.9% during the whole melting process in 0.03 s. This temperature measurement method is cost‐effective, independent of thermographic cameras, accurate, fast response, and can be updated for other related applications in industries and scientific studies. All programs and datasets are available on GitHub.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Science & EngineeringSame topicPhase Change Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207