MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036958896

Determination of major and minor components of smoke from full-scale fire tests of furnishings by FTIR spectroscopy

2001· article· en· W7036958896 on OpenAlexaffvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire dynamics and safety research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFourier transform infrared spectroscopySmokeCombustionSpectrometerCombustion productsFire hazardAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Gas analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last half of the 20th century, there was an increase in the use of man-made polymers, foams, composites and modified (fire-retarded) traditional materials for furnishings. With the increasing use of new materials, the measurement of a broader range of combustion products is required in small- and full-scale fire tests to provide the basis for hazard assessments. Recently, FTIR (Fourier Transform Infrared) spectrometers are being used to provide additional smoke gas analysis. This approach can provide continuous quantitative monitoring for the fire gases that have characteristic spectral bands in the infrared region of the spectrum. An FTIR spectrometer was used for smoke gas analysis on a series of full-scale room fire tests with lining materials typically found in retail outlet. It was also used for a series of tests using residential furnishings (mattresses and sofas). In the latter case, tests were conducted using a calorimeter facility as well as in a ten-storey test facility. In this paper, the CO and CO2 concentrations measured using the FTIR are compared to the results obtained using the traditional IR analyzer. The results for other selected fire products and by-products will also be discussed, including the dependence of their emissions on fire conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicFire dynamics and safety researchFrench-language works237,207