An Experimental Study for Examining the Effects of Environmental Conditions on Diffusion Coefficient of VOCs in Building Materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The diffusion coefficients (diffusivity) of five different volatile organic carbon compounds (VOCs), i. e., octane, isopropanol, cyclohexane, ethyl acetate, and hexane, were experimentally determined for a building ceiling tile. The effects of typical indoor environmental conditions on the diffusivity of the VOCs in the tile were evaluated over a range of temperatures (15, 23, 31 and 39°C) and at three relative humidity percentages (0, 20, and 40%). Three novel methods were developed during the course of this study: (i) a two‐chamber experimental apparatus for diffusivity testing of building materials, (ii) a GC/MS method for determining the above VOCs, and (iii) a two‐factor method for analyzing the statistical significance effects of temperature and humidity on VOC diffusivity. The results showed that the diffusion coefficients of the VOCs were positively related to their vapor pressure, but not to their boiling point, molecular weight or polarity index. No difference was observed between the diffusion coefficient of a VOC present alone or as part of a mixture of VOCs. Temperature and humidity (in the range of a typical indoor environment) had minor significant effects on the diffusion coefficient, with temperature being more important than humidity. It is hypothesized that water vapor molecules may occupy the pores of the ceiling tile material under conditions of high relative humidity and prevent the VOC molecules from diffusing through the pores.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".