MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998034477 · doi:10.1002/aic.690470528

Phase boundary calculations for solutions of a polydisperse polymer

2001· article· en· W1998034477 on OpenAlexafffund
Naveen Koak, Robert A. Heidemann

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPolymerThermodynamicsSolventMaterials sciencePhase (matter)PolyethyleneCloud pointLogarithmPolymer chemistryChemistryPhysicsMathematicsOrganic chemistryComposite materialMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A technique is described for performing phase boundary calculations (cloud‐point calculations) for solutions of a polydisperse polymer in a solvent component. The polymer is characterized as a potentially large number of individual components. The technique employs the Newton method for solving the nonlinear equilibrium equations. The independent variables in the equations are logarithms of the equilibrium ratios, temperature and pressure, and the mass ratio of polymer to solvent. A number of cloud‐point curves were calculated using the Sanchez–Lacombe equation as the thermodynamic model. The calculations were compared with experimental data for polyethylene (MW = 177,000 and MN = 8,000) with n‐hexane and polyethylene (MW = 99,000 and MN = 56,000) with ethylene. As expected, the disperse nature of the polymer significantly affected the calculated phase behavior of the polymer–solvent mixtures. Complicating features in the calculations are discussed.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207