MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039292076 · doi:10.1021/ef049764g

Monitoring Bitumen−Solvent Interactions with Low-Field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance and X-ray Computer-Assisted Tomography

2005· article· en· W2039292076 on OpenAlexaff
Yanwei Wen, Apostolos Kantzas

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolventAsphalteneAsphaltDiffusionChemistryViscosityAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Pulsed field gradientMaterials scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceMoleculeChromatographyThermodynamicsOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work involves the detection and monitoring of solvent interactions with heavy oil and bitumen. Two nondestructive methods low-field nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and X-ray computer-assisted tomography (CAT) were used. It is shown that low-field NMR can be a very useful tool in understanding the relationship of viscosity, density, and asphaltene precipitation in bitumen−solvent mixtures. Such mixtures are present in solvent-related heavy oil and bitumen recovery processes, such as vapor extraction (VAPEX). As a solvent comes into contact with a heavy oil or bitumen sample, the mobility of hydrogen-bearing molecules of both solvent and oil changes. These changes are detectable through changes in the NMR relaxation characteristics of both the solvent and the oil and can be correlated to mass flux and concentration changes. Based on Fick's second law, diffusion coefficients were calculated for combinations of three oils and six solvents. X-ray CAT scanning was also used in parallel for analysis of solvent diffusion into the bitumen. As the solvent was diffusing into the bitumen, a concentration gradient was obtained. Concentration values at certain times were used to calculate diffusion coefficients, which were compared with results obtained from NMR data, using both an analytical method and a numerical method. The diffusion coefficients were considered either as constants or as functions of solvent concentration in two models that have been developed during this research. The overall diffusion coefficients calculated for several pairs of oils and solvents at different ratios, both by NMR data and X-ray tomography, were on the order of 10 - 6 cm 2 /s.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations95
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207