MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980479471 · doi:10.1063/1.2166394

Molecular theory of thermal conductivity of the Lennard-Jones fluid

2006· article· en· W1980479471 on OpenAlexafffund
Afshin Eskandari Nasrabad, Rozita Laghaei, Byung Chan Eu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsThermal conductivityMonte Carlo methodMolecular dynamicsStatistical physicsVirial coefficientRadial distribution functionLennard-Jones potentialvan der Waals forceVirial theoremEquation of stateThermodynamicsCorrelation function (quantum field theory)Non-equilibrium thermodynamicsPhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper the thermal conductivity of the Lennard-Jones fluid is calculated by applying the combination of the density-fluctuation theory, the modified free volume theory of diffusion, and the generic van der Waals equation of state. A Monte Carlo simulation method is used to compute the equilibrium pair-correlation function necessary for computing the mean free volume and the coefficient in the potential-energy and virial contributions to the thermal conductivity. The theoretical results are compared with our own molecular dynamics simulation results and with those reported in the literature. They agree in good accuracy over wide ranges of density and temperature examined in molecular dynamics simulations. Thus the combined theory represents a molecular theory of thermal conductivity of the Lennard-Jones fluid and by extension simple fluids, which enables us to compute the nonequilibrium quantity by means of the Monte Carlo simulations for the equilibrium pair-correlation function.

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 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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207