MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001619053 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20086

Binary coalescence of air bubbles in viscous liquids in presence of non‐ionic surfactant

2008· article· en· W2001619053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
K. Giribabu, Pallab Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalescence (physics)Pulmonary surfactantEthylene glycolSurface tensionBubbleThermodynamicsAqueous solutionMaterials scienceWork (physics)ChemistryChemical engineeringMechanicsPhysical chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coalescence of air bubbles is important in gas–liquid reactors and food processing operations. Bubbles can be stabilized by using non‐ionic surfactants. Binary coalescence of air bubbles in ethylene glycol and aqueous glycerol solutions were studied in this work in presence of Span 80. A novel set‐up was developed to study long coalescence times. Coalescence time was observed to follow broad stochastic distributions in all systems. The distributions were fitted with a stochastic model developed earlier. The surface tension of ethylene glycol and glycerol solutions was measured at various concentrations of Span 80. These data were fitted using a surface equation of state derived from the Langmuir isotherm. The effect of surfactant concentration on coalescence time was explained in terms of the surface excess of the surfactant and the repulsive force generated at the air–liquid interface. The results from this work illustrate the stochastic nature of bubble coalescence in viscous liquids. This work also demonstrates how non‐ionic surfactants can stabilize bubbles in such liquids.

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicFluid Dynamics and MixingFrench-language works237,207