MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065543833 · doi:10.1063/1.1373663

Density and temperature dependence of the bulk viscosity of molecular liquids: Carbon dioxide and nitrogen

2001· article· en· W2065543833 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyunil Rah, Byung Chan Eu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsViscosityCarbon dioxideThermodynamicsIntermolecular forceVolume viscosityRelative viscosityLiquid nitrogenChemistryTemperature dependence of liquid viscosityNitrogenWork (physics)DiffusionShear viscosityMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryMoleculePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A statistical mechanical formula is developed for the bulk viscosity of molecular liquids. It is expressed in terms of the self-diffusion coefficient of the liquid, intermolecular forces, and the site–site pair correlation functions. The density and temperature dependence of the bulk viscosity of carbon dioxide and nitrogen are calculated therewith and compared with experimental data wherever possible. In the case of liquid nitrogen for which experimental data are available the theoretical values of the bulk viscosity are well within the experimental error ranges in almost all cases. There are no experimental data to compare with the theoretical results for liquid carbon dioxide, but in the light of the comparison for nitrogen and the excellent shear viscosity results which were obtained in the same line of approach in the previous work the calculated bulk viscosity values of liquid carbon dioxide may be treated as theoretical predictions.

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)0.002
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations40
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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