MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

<i>In Situ</i> Observation of Fouling Behavior under Thermal Cracking Conditions: Hue, Saturation, and Intensity Image Analyses

2015· article· en· W2240016674 on OpenAlexaff
C. Laborde-Boutet, David Q. Dinh, Fabian Bender, Miguel Medina, William C. McCaffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMesophaseHueFoulingBrightnessMaterials scienceCrackingChemical engineeringMineralogyChemistryComposite materialAnalytical Chemistry (journal)OpticsChromatographyOptoelectronicsLiquid crystal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermal cracking reactions of a variety of heavy petroleum feeds were analyzed by in situ cross-polarized microscopy using a reactor equipped with a sapphire window. Cross-polarized microscopy is a powerful technique for detecting the formation of anisotropic domains of carbonaceous material (mesophase coke). The present study, however, focused on the characterization of the chemical and physical events prior to the formation of new phases by evaluating the changes in image properties with reaction time. Results showed that changes in image brightness were strongly correlated to the conversion of 524+ °C material but could not provide much insight regarding the stability of reacting oils. Color analyses of the cross-polarized micrographs, however, revealed a consistent red-to-blue color shift around the point of instability. This color shift corresponded to either the formation of a fouling layer of isotropic material or a homogeneous color change of the reacting medium, indicating the formation of CS 2 -insoluble material. In both cases, the beginning of the color shift preceded the formation of mesophase, whose appearance had the effect of enhancing the blue color of the samples. The detection of the red-to-blue color shift in reacting samples under thermal cracking conditions provides an improved framework for testing the fouling propensity of feeds or for developing online sensors operating on industrial units.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & Fuels→Same topicPetroleum Processing and Analysis→French-language works237,207→