Measuring optical properties of cooled post-flame soot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The optical properties of soot are a much-studied topic, yet most works on the subject yield surprisingly different results. This is perhaps due to the variation in fuels used, from solid fuels such as plexiglass and polystyrene, to liquid fuels such as n-heptane and toluene, to gaseous fuels like propane, acetylene, ethylene and ethane. Alternatively, observed differences could be due to the variation in methods used for the measurements, such as reflectivity of compacted soot, tomographic reconstruction, and optical methods using combinations of scattering, absorption, and extinction. Some studies involve calculation of theoretical properties rather than direct measurement, such as Lee and Tien who arrived at their values using dispersion model. What these studies share is that the soot under study was obtained either within a flame or very shortly post-flame or sampled from a flame and physically altered after cooling. The present study examines the optical properties of combustion-generated soot, sampled far enough downstream that is has cooled to ambient temperature. This soot will be characterized with the aid of scanning and transmission electron microscopy (SEM/TEM) along with a multiple low-angle scattering diagnostic.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".