MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414255653 · doi:10.1002/cjce.70081

Fluidization characteristics of rice husk with and without coal using a bubbling fluidized cold bed model

2025· article· en· W4414255653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gautam Prasad Dewangan, Samarendra Nath Saha, Raghwendra Singh Thakur, Saurabh Meshram, Pankaj Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluidizationHuskCoalFraction (chemistry)Fluidized bedParticle sizeMass fractionFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The fluidization behaviour was investigated using a cold flow bubbling fluidized bed setup with a column of 8 cm inner diameter. Minimum fluidization velocities ( U mf ) were experimentally determined for both mono‐component (rice husk or coal) and binary mixtures of rice husk and coal, using air as the fluidizing medium. For the binary mixtures, U mf,m was measured by varying the weight fraction and particle size of coal. It was observed that fluidization performance improved significantly with an increase in the coal weight fraction. Conversely, higher proportions of rice husk led to deteriorated fluidization behaviour due to its low bulk density and irregular particle shape. To predict the U mf,m for specific mixtures, two empirical correlations were developed for rice husk weight fractions of 20% and 40%. These correlations showed good agreement with experimental results, with relative errors within 7%.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207