MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084666630 · doi:10.1021/ie030573v

Heat-Transfer Analogy for Wax Deposition from Paraffinic Mixtures

2003· article· en· W2084666630 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsWaxAnalogyHeat transferDeposition (geology)Chemical engineeringMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemistryOrganic chemistryGeologyPhysicsPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wax deposition from mixtures of a paraffinic wax (C 20 −C 40 ) dissolved in n -dodecane (C 12 ) was investigated. A novel batch apparatus was developed, in which the flow of a “hot” wax−C 12 mixture was accomplished with an axial flow propeller while the solid deposition took place on the inner “cold” surface of a draft tube. The effects of mixture composition, shear rate, residence time, and temperature on solid deposition were studied at pseudo-steady state. Predictions from a steady-state heat-transfer model were in good agreement with experimental data, which confirmed the wax deposition process to be controlled primarily by heat transfer. A temperature difference ratio corresponding to the fractional temperature difference across the deposit layer was related to the amount of deposited solids. GC analyses of the deposited solids were used to study compositional changes within the liquid and solid phases.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.254 · 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