ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Decision-Theoretic Ecological Optimization of the Curzon-Ahlborn Heat Engine.
Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Finite-time heat engines must balance useful power output against irreversibility. We develop a decision-theoretic framework for ecological optimization of the endoreversible Curzon-Ahlborn engine based on its normalized power-loss Pareto frontier. We first examine bargaining-based selection rules. For Newtonian heat transfer, a symmetric Nash compromise between retained power and reduced exergy destruction selects a unique interior operating point with efficiency ηN=1-τ3/4, where τ=Tc/Th is the cold-to-hot reservoir temperature ratio. The same Newtonian state is recovered by the Arias-Hernández-Angulo-Brown prescription, which fixes the ecological weight from the maximum-power reference. Our contribution is therefore not a new efficiency law but a decision-theoretic interpretation of the established 3/4 law as a distinguished compromise between maximum-power operation and the reversible Carnot limit. Under the same normalization, the Kalai-Smorodinsky and egalitarian selectors also identify the same balance point. We then extend the bargaining analysis beyond Newton's law of cooling and compare the Nash continuation with the Arias-Hernández-Angulo-Brown Eϵ - Cϵ prescription. Although coinciding in the Newtonian limit, the two approaches separate at first order when the heat-transfer law is perturbed, thereby distinguishing their underlying selection principles. This comparison raises a further question: how should an operating state be chosen when the relative priority assigned to power and irreversibility reduction is itself uncertain? We address this question through minimax-regret optimization, which selects the operating point that minimizes the largest loss relative to the optimum that would have been chosen had the priority been known. Under complete normalized uncertainty in the ecological priority, the regret-robust selector again yields η=1-τ3/4, giving the same operating state a complementary interpretation in terms of robustness to priority uncertainty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.