MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965662010 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20213

Concentration of aqueous dye solution by freezing and thawing

2009· article· en· W1965662010 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFreezing and Crystallization Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEutectic systemAqueous solutionDiffusionMatrix (chemical analysis)ChemistryCongelationThermodynamicsMaterials scienceChromatographyChemical engineeringMicrostructurePhysical chemistryCrystallography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The concentration phenomena during freezing and thawing were investigated to study the feasibility of freeze–thaw process as a concentration operation. An aqueous dye solution was employed as a model binary eutectic solution. The localised concentration in the frozen matrix was determined, and the concentration profile of the melting solution during thawing was examined. It was found that the solution obtained during thawing showed higher concentration than the original solution, and the concentration did not correspond to the amount of solute localised in the frozen matrix. It was suggested that the concentration phenomena during thawing would be governed by the melting droplet growth rate at the melting interface and by the diffusion rate of solute from eutectic phases to the droplet.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.154 · 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