Determining Surface Potential of the Bitumen‐Water Interface at Nanoscale Resolution using Atomic Force Microscopy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to measure the surface forces between a silicon nitride AFM tip and a deposited layer of Athabasca bitumen; the measurements were carried out in pure water (pH 6.0–6.5) and 1 mM KCl solution (pH 9). An AFM pyramidal‐shaped tip was moved stepwise using an operator‐controlled offset (10 nm per step) and the tip‐bitumen colloidal forces were measured at each location. Surface charge densities at the bitumen‐water interface were calculated from the measured colloidal forces using a theoretical model that combined both electrostatic and van der Waals forces for a conical tip‐flat substrate system. Fitted values of the bitumen surface charge density ranged from –0.002 to –0.004 C/m 2 in water (pH 6.0–6.5), and –0.005 to –0.022 C/m 2 in KCl solution (pH 9); the variation of local charge density along the bitumen surface appeared random. Bitumen surface potentials were also calculated from the surface charge densities using the Graham equation; the values ranged from –90 to –130 mV in water, and –45 to –110 mV in KCl solution. This study suggests the presence of bitumen surface domains of different surface charge densities/surface potentials. The domains are estimated to have characteristic sizes of 20 to 40 nm or less.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".