MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966054593 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22000

Critical review of mutual diffusion coefficient measurements for liquid solvent + bitumen/heavy oil mixtures

2014· article· en· W1966054593 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicDiffusion Coefficients in Liquids
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAsphaltDiffusionSolventOpacityMeasure (data warehouse)Materials scienceWork (physics)Petroleum engineeringProcess engineeringChemistryComputer scienceThermodynamicsGeologyOrganic chemistryPhysicsEngineeringOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information about diffusion in solvent + bitumen/heavy oil mixtures is useful for the design of solvent‐assisted recovery processes as a key parameter in reservoir simulation models. Reliable mutual diffusion coefficient measurements for these systems present significant challenges. In this article, experimental techniques for the study of diffusion in liquid solvent + bitumen/heavy oil systems are critically reviewed, and the strengths and weaknesses of each method are highlighted. Despite considerable progress in this area with the application of state‐of‐the‐art techniques, such as X‐ray computer‐assisted tomography measurements, additional work is needed to measure the composition profiles in these opaque systems more precisely and to analyse the measured concentration profiles more conveniently.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.228 · 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