Cited by 187Nuclear Engineering Thermal-HydraulicsFluid Dynamics and MixingHeat Transfer and Boiling Studies

Two-group interfacial area transport equations at bubbly-to-slug flow transition

Hibiki, Takashi, Ishii, Mamoru·2000·Nuclear Engineering and Design

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0029-5493(00)00286-7

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hibiki, T., & Ishii, M.
Affiliations
  • Kyoto University (JP)
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Ishii, Mamoru
Venue
Nuclear Engineering and Design
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-11
Volume
202
Issue
1
Pages
39-76
ISSN
0029-5493 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025477072
Cited by
187
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
17.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Nuclear Engineering and Design (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Nuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Fluid Dynamics and Mixing
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Heat Transfer and Boiling Studies
Keywords
interfacial area transport equation, slug flow, bubble breakup, bubble coalescence, bubble interaction, two-phase flow, interfacial area concentration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review