Comment on “Glass transition in pure and doped amorphous solid water: An ultrafast microcalorimetry study” [J. Chem. Phys. 125, 094501 (2006)]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On investigating the data of Chonde et al. [J. Chem. Phys.125, 094501 (2006)], we find that (i) the relaxation time of the test liquid toluene used for determining the ultrafast scans’ reliability was mistaken by several decades and incorrectly plotted, (ii) extrinsic effects had led to an exceptionally broad endotherm showing an enthalpy relaxation occurring implausibly at 500ps time scale, (iii) enthalpy relaxation times at structural unfreezing and at crystallization temperatures were assumed to be the same, equal to the reciprocal of the heating rate, and (iv) the data for water were incorrectly analyzed. An appropriate analysis would alter their conclusion and would be useful for discussing other ultrafast scans and nanocalorimetry data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".