MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mass and heat transfer resistivities at liquid–vapor interfaces: Beyond the ideal gas

2025· article· en· W4415115403 on OpenAlexafffund
Henning Struchtrup

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEvaporationHeat transfer coefficientMass transferHeat transferIdeal gasCondensationIdeal (ethics)Churchill–Bernstein equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The classical Hertz–Knudsen–Schrage (HKS) model for non-equilibrium mass and heat transfer across liquid–vapor interfaces is extended to account for real gas effects and non-linearity. Specifically, the HKS relations are re-derived for a temperature and velocity dependent condensation coefficient (Tsuruta et al., 1999) and combined with real gas property relations derived from the Enskog–Vlasov (EV) equation (Struchtrup and Frezzotti, 2022). The resulting non-linear Tsuruta–EV–HKS model is valid for mass and heat transfer up to the critical point. The resulting interfacial resistivities exhibit marked dependence on temperature, with resistivities strongly decreasing towards the critical point, as well as non-linear dependence on mass and heat flux. • Hertz–Knudsen–Schrage model extended to real gas vapors and non-linear transport. • Evaporation and heat transfer resistivities vanish towards the critical point. • Non-linearities affect interface resistance. • Molecular Dynamics simulations show similar trends. • Marked temperature dependence and non-linearity affect experiments and simulations.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Heat and Mass TransferSame topicnanoparticles nucleation surface interactionsFrench-language works237,207