Coating Mass Dependence of Soot Aggregate Restructuring due to Coatings of Oleic Acid and Dioctyl Sebacate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soot particles in the atmosphere can be coated with organic or nonorganic material, which may affect particle morphology and optical properties. The effect of the mass of coating on the morphology of soot particles was studied using oleic acid and dioctyl sebacate (DOS) coatings. A wide range of coatings were used, with up to 10 times as much coating as the mass of the soot. It is shown that as the coating mass increases the degree of collapsing increases until the coating is so large that the soot particle becomes completely contained within a spherical droplet of the coating material. Higher amounts of coating will not cause further collapse of the particle. The degree of collapse is also a function of the initial size of the soot particle but was independent of the coating materials tested, which have similar surface tensions. A model is presented to predict the change in mobility diameter as a function of coating mass ratio. The effect of coating mass on effective density, shape factor, and fractal dimension is also reported. Copyright 2013 American Association for Aerosol Research
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".