MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047585195 · doi:10.1007/s11746-006-1241-8

Determining the acid number of biodiesel

2006· article· en· W2047585195 on OpenAlexaff
Sonam Mahajan, Samir K. Konar, D. G. B. Boocock

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Oil Chemists Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Research Studies Overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcid valueRepeatabilityPotassium hydroxideBiodieselReproducibilityTitrationChemistryChromatographyDiesel fuelPalmitic acidPulp and paper industryFatty acidOrganic chemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Commerical biodiesel is composed of FAME. It may also contain small amounts of FA, which are quantified by an acid number, expressed as milligrams of potassium hydroxide required to neutralize 1 g of sample. In 2006, the ASTM D 6751 biodiesel acid‐number limit was harmonized with the European biodiesel value of 0.50. ASTM D 664 is the standard reference method for measuring the acid number of both ASTM biodiesel and petroleum‐derived diesel. This potentiometric method cites acceptable repeatability and mediocre reproducibility, but no information on accuracy. ASTM D 974 is a non‐aqueous colorimetric titration that uses potassium hydroxide in isopropanol as the titrant and p‐naphtholbenzein as indicator. It was designed for petroleum products and is suitable for colored samples. It has been tested on nine palmitic acid/soybean oil standards in the acid‐number range of 0.198 to 1.17. All accuracies were within 3.3%. The repeatability was approximately 6% at an acid number of 0.5. The reproducibility appears to be only slightly greater than the repeatability at an acid number of 0.5. It is concluded that ASTM D 974 is a good method for evaluating the acid‐number compliance of biodiesel samples.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations94
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Oil Chemists SocietySame topicDiverse Research Studies OverviewFrench-language works237,207