MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7090307993 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580816

Emission Testing of Flex Fuel Vehicles up to M100/E100: Upgradation of Existing Test Facility for Vehicles below 3.5-ton GVW for Testing Methanol or Ethanol Operated Vehicles

2025· article· en· W7090307993 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFLEXTest (biology)MethanolTest method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is focused on enhancing the existing dilute emission measurement system to accommodate the emission testing of vehicles operating with gasoline blends with methanol and ethanol, dedicated M100/E100 etc. India is moving towards achieving the E20 blend on the pan-country level by April 2025 with the initiations of NITI Aayog and exploring alternate fuels like 100% methanol and ethanol.Government of India is now focused on introducing the flex fuel vehicle (FFV) technology that supports the usage of higher ethanol blends.As per CMVR guidelines for M and N category vehicles with a gross vehicle weight less than 3,500 kg; a dilute emission measurement system is used to evaluate tailpipe pollutants and fuel economy.Most of the present emission systems are compatible with testing the vehicle till M15 and E20 blends.Beyond this percentage, usage of a test facility for M100, E100, and other flex-fuel vehicles, require certain modifications in existing test facility to maintain the precision and reliability of the results considering higher water content in exhaust and effect of condensation on emission measurement due to dilution.The modifications needed, implementation and their impact are experimentally briefed in the present paper.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés→Same topicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology→French-language works237,207→