MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117472363 · doi:10.3390/fluids11010006

A Unified Drift–Flux Framework for Predictive Analysis of Flow Patterns and Void Fractions in Vertical Gas Lift Systems

2025· article· en· W7117472363 on OpenAlexaff
Omid Heydari, Sohrab Zendehboudi, Stephen Butt

Bibliographic record

VenueFluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPorosityParameterized complexityParametric statisticsVoid (composites)Lift (data mining)Inflection pointComputational fluid dynamicsGas liftFlow (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study utilizes the drift–flux model to develop a new flow pattern map designed to facilitate an accurate estimation of gas void fraction (αg) in vertical upward flow. The map is parameterized by mixture velocity (um) and gas volumetric quality (βg), integrating transition criteria from the established literature. For applications characterized by significant pressure gradients, such as gas lift, these criteria were reformulated as functions of pressure, enabling direct estimation from operational data. A critical component of this methodology for the estimation of αg is the estimation of the distribution parameter (C0). An analysis of experimental data, spanning pipe diameters from 1.27 to 15 cm across the full void fraction ranges (0<αg<1), reveals a critical αg threshold beyond which C0 exhibits a distinct decreasing trend. To characterize this phenomenon, the parameter of the distribution-weighted void fraction (αc=αgC0) is introduced. This parameter, representing the dynamically effective void fraction, identifies the critical threshold at its inflection point. The proposed model subsequently defines C0 using a two-part function of αc. This generalized approach simplifies the complexity inherent in existing correlations and demonstrates superior predictive accuracy, reducing the average error in αg estimations to 5.4% and outperforming established methods. Furthermore, the model’s parametric architecture is explicitly designed to support the optimization and fine-tuning of coefficients, enabling future use of machine learning for various fluids and complex industrial cases.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.795
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueFluidsSame topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207