Relationship between the Chemical Structure of Humic Substances and their Hygroscopic Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the relationship between the hygroscopic properties and chemical structures of humic and fulvic acids. Humic and fulvic acids were extracted from andosol, Canadian peat and Chinese weathered coal using the IHSS method. Fulvic-like organics produced by the ozone oxidation of humic acid were also prepared by a method reported previously. Their main chemical properties related to hygroscopicity were also studied by elemental analysis and the measurement of functional group contents. Humic and fulvic acids were allowed to stand under various relative humidity (RH) conditions and the amounts of water vapor adsorbed were measured by gravimetry. Water adsorption isotherms were similar for both humic and fulvic acids below RH 80%. Above 80%, water vapor adsorption of fulvic acids and fulvic-like organics increased considerably as compared with humic acids. Deliquescence was observed for all fulvic acids and fulvic-like organics at higher RH. The amount of water vapor adsorbed at 97% RH by humic substances from different sources was highly correlated with the ratio of oxygen to carbon contents. Permanent URL: http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d10006072
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) | 0.001 | 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".