MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146098036 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450820404

Interaction between Bitumen and Fines in Oil Sands Extraction System: Implication to Bitumen Recovery

2004· article· en· W2146098036 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphaltOil sandsZeta potentialAtomic force microscopyExtraction (chemistry)AsphalteneDivalentChemical engineeringChemistryMineralogyMaterials scienceComposite materialMetallurgyChromatographyNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Colloidal interactions between bitumen and fines, extracted directly from oil sand ores, were investigated with zeta potential distribution measurement and surface force measurement using an atomic force microscope (AFM). Fines from good processing ores exhibit a negligible attachment to bitumen surfaces, due to hydrophilic nature of the fines. Fines from poor processing ores exhibit a stronger attachment to bitumen surfaces by an attractive hydrophobic force between bitumen and fines, due to hydrophobic nature of the fines and the presence of high concentration divalent cations in the processing water.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.208 · 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