MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118579020 · doi:10.1139/v10-135

Interactions between gemini and nonionic pharmaceutical surfactants

2010· article· en· W2118579020 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Javed Akbar, Rubena Deubry, D. Gerrard Marangoni, Shawn Wettig

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSurfactants and Colloidal Systems
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryPulmonary surfactantSorbitanHomologous seriesAlkylSurface tensionMicelleCritical micelle concentrationSaturation (graph theory)Nonionic surfactantOrganic chemistryMixing (physics)Chemical engineeringStearateChromatographyThermodynamicsAqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nature and strength of the interactions between the 1,3-bis(dimethylhexadecyl)propanediammonium dibromide (16-3-16) gemini surfactant and a homologous series of nonionic polyoxyethylene (20) sorbitan ester surfactants having laurate (Tween 20), stearate (Tween 60), or oleate (Tween 80) alkyl tails has been investigated. The critical micelle concentration (cmc) values of the mixed gemini–tween systems were determined using the du Noüy ring surface tension method, and the results have been analyzed using Clint’s, Rubingh’s, Motomura’s, and Maeda’s theories for mixed micellar systems. The results demonstrate a synergistic mixing behaviour between the Tween surfactants and the 16-3-16 gemini surfactant, where the strength of interaction is dependent upon the chain length and saturation of the Tween alkyl tail.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSurfactants and Colloidal SystemsFrench-language works237,207