Análisis comparativo de las características técnicas de refrigerantes y sus efectos sobre el medioambiente
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently there are different types of refrigerants used in cooling systems. To choose the ideal fluid, it is necessary to consider the thermodynamic properties such as condenser and evaporator pressure, boiling, critical and freezing temperatures, specific volume, enthalpy, which allow a maximum cooling capacity with a minimum power demand; additionally, observe that the environmental effects are low and do not cause damage to the ozone layer as a consequence of the destructive action of the chlorine-containing compounds from the decomposition of the CFC and HCFC molecules. This is a comparative-descriptive research that aims to analyze the technical characteristics of refrigerants and their effects on the environment. The data were collected from a research review, defining the current situation and future trends of the same; Presenting them in a comparative summary table highlighting the changes made from the implementation of international agreements from the Montreal Protocol to the Paris Protocol, whichpromote the reduction of the emission of these gases into the atmosphere.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".