Liquid–liquid phase separation in particles containing organics mixed with ammonium sulfate, ammonium bisulfate, ammonium nitrate or sodium chloride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. As the relative humidity varies from high to low values in the atmosphere, particles containing organic species and inorganic salts may undergo liquid–liquid phase separation. The majority of the laboratory work on this subject has used ammonium sulfate as the inorganic salt. In the following we studied liquid–liquid phase separation in particles containing organics mixed with the following salts: ammonium sulfate, ammonium bisulfate, ammonium nitrate and sodium chloride. In each experiment one organic was mixed with one inorganic salt and the liquid–liquid phase separation relative humidity (SRH) was determined. Since we studied 23 different organics mixed with four different salts, a total of 92 different particle types were investigated. Out of the 92 types, 49 underwent liquid–liquid phase separation. For all the inorganic salts, liquid–liquid phase separation was never observed when the oxygen-to-carbon elemental ratio (O : C) ≥ 0.8 and was always observed for O : C < 0.5. For 0.5 ≤ O : C < 0.8, the results depended on the salt type. Out of the 23 organic species investigated, the SRH of 20 organics followed the trend: (NH4)2SO4 ≥ NH4HSO4 ≥ NaCl ≥ NH4NO3. This trend is consistent with previous salting out studies and the Hofmeister series. Based on the range of O : C values found in the atmosphere and the current results, liquid–liquid phase separation is likely a frequent occurrence in both marine and non-marine environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".