MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968735824 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2014-0535

Kinetic effect of single MgCl<sub>2</sub> and NaCl aqueous solutions on ethane hydrate formation

2015· article· en· W1968735824 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhen Long, Deqing Liang, Dongliang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryHydrateAqueous solutionClathrate hydrateKineticsDiffusionReaction rate constantKinetic energyInorganic chemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ThermodynamicsChromatographyPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experimental data on the kinetics of C2H6 hydrate formation in the presence of pure water and two aqueous single solutions, MgCl2 and NaCl, are presented in this study. The measurements of experimental hydrate formation process were performed in a high pressure reactor at 276.15 K, at initial pressure range of 2.0–2.4 MPa, and solution concentration range of 2.34–10 wt%. The effect of solution concentration and initial pressure on the induction time, gas consumption, conversion, and storage capacity and growth rate was examined. It was observed that with the increase of the solution concentration, the induction time increased, while the storage capacity and the number of moles of C2H6 consumed decreased. A diffusion-reaction kinetics model was employed to predict the hydrate growth rate at the beginning of hydrate formation. The results showed that the addition of MgCl2 and NaCl decreased the apparent rate constant, and MgCl2 had a greater effect than NaCl in inhibiting the hydrate growth.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207