Size dependence of the solubility of nonpolar compounds in different solvents
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At 25°C, plots of the standard Gibbs energy change associated with the solvation of noble gases and aliphatic hydrocarbons vs. the size of the solutes prove to be approximately linear with a negative slope for common organic solvents but not for water. In the latter case, the plot has a characteristic V-shape. The slope is negative for noble gases, methane, and ethane, but is positive for larger alkanes. This means that the solubility of nonpolar solutes increases with solute size in every solvent except water. The solvation thermodynamics of noble gases and aliphatic hydrocarbons in five solvents (water, ethanol, benzene, c-hexane, and n-hexane) are analyzed in detail by a general theory, which is rederived to avoid risky misunderstandings. The calculations are performed in the same manner for all solvents, using simple formulas where the physical reliability is well established and the results are consistent. The work of cavity creation increases with solute size in every solvent, but to a far greater extent in water. Additionally, the work to turn on the solutesolvent attractive interactions increases in magnitude with solute size in every solvent, but to a lesser extent in water. By combining these two factors a satisfactory explanation for experimental data obtained emerges. The microscopic origins of the difference between water and common organic solvents are discussed.Key words: solvation, excluded-volume effect, solutesolvent interactions, enthalpyentropy compensation, molecular size.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 it