Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of the four main equations in thermodynamics for the surface tension of condensed matter, i.e. the generalized and classical Lippmann equations and the Shuttleworth and Gokhshtein equations, only the classical Lippmann and Gokhshtein equations have been confirmed experimentally. The generalized Lippmann (Couchman–Davidson) equation is considered to be more universal, since three other equations could be derived from it. Although this fact has been widely accepted, it was recently reevaluated in two opposite ways. In the first approach, the experimental verification of the Gokhshtein equation should support the correctness of the generalized Lippmann and Shuttleworth equations. In the second approach, the incompatibility of the Shuttleworth equation with Hermann's mathematical structure of thermodynamics throws doubts upon all its corollaries, including the generalized Lippmann and Gokhshtein equations. However, both of these approaches are here shown to be erroneous, since the Gokhshtein equation cannot be correctly derived from any of the above-mentioned equations, and the opposite is also true: neither the generalized Lippmann nor Shuttleworth equations could be derived from the Gokhshtein equation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".