MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of Hazards in a Flammable Gas Experiment and Development of a Testing Regime for a Polypropylene Vacuum Window

2023· article· en· W6944185090 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueJACOW · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiative Heat Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsChicken Farmers of Saskatchewan (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlammable liquidPolypropyleneWindow (computing)ThermocoupleBeamlineMethaneInfraredAbsorption (acoustics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Far Infrared Spectroscopy (Far-IR) is a bend magnet infrared beamline at the Canadian Light Source. The beamline utilizes a gas cell loaded with experimental gas which light is bounced through and a spectrometer to measure the absorption of the gas. For an experiment at Far-IR utilizing methane and nitrogen at 100K temperatures, issues with icing and inconsistent absorption gradients were noted at the Polymethylpentene Rigid Plastic (TPX TM) window separating the cell filled with the flammable gas mixture from the vacuum of the spectrometer. The possibility of replacing the existing windows with new 50-micron thick polypropylene windows was investigated. Material properties were not available for polypropylene at the operating temperature of the experiment. Due to the hazardous nature of the gas being held back a hazard analysis was carried out to identify potential risks and mitigations for the change. Additionally, with material properties unavailable, a testing regime was established to ensure the polypropylene could survive in the experimental environment. The experiment was successfully completed using the modified window assemblies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.266
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 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACOWSame topicRadiative Heat Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207