Molar Heat Capacity (<i>C</i><sub><i>p</i></sub>) of Aqueous Cyclic Amine Solutions from (298.15 to 353.15) K
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Molar heat capacities at 11 different temperatures in the range (298.15 to 353.15) K are reported for aqueous 1,4-dimethyl piperazine (1,4-DMPZ), 1-(2-hydroxyethyl) piperazine (1,2-HEPZ), 1-methyl piperazine (1-MPZ), 3-morpholinopropyl amine (3-MOPA), and 4-(2-hydroxyethyl) morpholine (4,2-HEMO) solutions. Molar heat capacities of MDEA and MEA were also measured and compared with published data resulting in a 1 % experimental uncertainty. Molar excess heat capacities were correlated as a function of mole fraction and temperature employing the Redlich–Kister relation. Excess partial molar quantities were calculated and reported. Group additivity analysis was performed using the molar heat capacities for all the above cyclic amines, and data were fitted with less than 0.5 AAD%. Among the five amines studied, 3-MOPA had the highest values of molar heat capacity and 1-MPZ had the lowest. The values of molar heat capacity of amines were dominated by −CH 2 and −OH group contributions. The contributions of −CH 2, −N, −OH, −O, and −NH 2 groups increased with increasing temperature, and the contributions of −NH and −CH 3 groups decreased with increasing temperature for these cyclic amines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".