MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024256105 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22093

Hydrocarbons – water phase equilibria using the CPA equation of state with a group contribution method

2014· article· en· W2024256105 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martha Hajiw, Antonin Chapoy, Christophe Coquelet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolubilityEquation of stateHydrocarbonThermodynamicsChemistryAlkeneFlory–Huggins solution theoryPhase (matter)Group contribution methodGroup (periodic table)Binary numberPhase equilibriumPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It is proposed in this paper to extend the original group contribution method PPR78 to systems containing water, by combining it to the Cubic–Plus–Association (CPA) equation of state (EoS). Applying simple geometric combination rules, the binary interaction parameter k ij (T) can be calculated from interaction parameters between hydrocarbon groups and water. This model, called the GC–PR–CPA is applied to predict hydrocarbons – water mutual solubilities over a wide temperature and pressure range, depending on available literature data. Group interaction parameters, here CH 4 , C 2 H 6 , CH 3 , CH 2 , CH, C, CH aro , CH 2,cyclic , CH cyclic /C cyclic , C 2 H 4 , CH 2,alkene /CH alkene with H 2 O have been defined with solubility data. Predictions of the developed model have been validated against independent solubility data as well as water content in hydrocarbon rich phase. Predictions of the new model are in good agreement for light and medium hydrocarbons; however, some deviations are observed for heavier hydrocarbons.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations44
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207