Prediction of the McAllister Model Parameters by Using the Group-Contribution Method: <i>n</i>-Alkane Liquid Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The McAllister model is considered to be the best correlating technique for viscosity−composition data. In a series of publications, Asfour et al. and Nhaesi and Asfour successfully converted the McAllister model into a predictive model which requires only the viscosities of the pure components and the molecular parameters of the constituents of a liquid mixture. They validated the model for the cases of n -alkane and regular liquid systems by using data on a large number of liquid mixtures at different temperatures. In this paper, we propose a novel technique for predicting the McAllister model parameters, for n -alkane systems, by the group-contribution method. The predictive capability of the McAllister model in this case is shown, for n -alkane binary and multicomponent systems, to be better or at least as good as the techniques reported earlier. The main advantage of the technique we are proposing here is that we expect it to be able to successfully and reliably predict more classes of liquid solutions than earlier methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".