MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dielectric Relaxation-Based Capacitive Heating of Oil Sands

2016· article· en· W2284982941 on OpenAlexafffund
Tinu Abraham, C. W. Van Neste, Artin Afacan, Thomas Thundat

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersInstitute for Oil Sands Innovation, University of AlbertaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCapacitive sensingDielectric spectroscopyMaterials scienceRelaxation (psychology)Electrical impedanceDielectricSilicateCapacitanceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Electric heatingComposite materialChemistryOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringElectrodeElectrochemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An electrothermal method of capacitive heating of oil sands was investigated. Temperature-based impedance spectroscopy experiments for a given rich grade of oil sands were conducted to identify a suitable dielectric relaxation frequency for carrying out capacitive heating, which was observed to be around 65 kHz having a full width at half-maximum of two decades. This was attributed to interfacial polarizations at water, bitumen, and silicate mineral interfaces. The relaxation frequency changed with temperature rise, indicating that frequency tuning could be suitable to optimize capacitive heating. Hence, capacitive heating of oil sands was demonstrated by exposing it to high alternating electric fields (10 4 V/m) at a frequency in the dispersion regime of its relaxation frequency. As temperature increased, the overall impedance of oil sands decreased as determined from impedance spectroscopy. Frequency was retuned to match the changed impedance of the system, which ensured that temperature further increased.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207