The Effect of Hydrophilic and Hydrophobic Multi-Wall Carbon Nanotubes on Methane Dissolution Rates in Water at Three Phase Equilibrium (V−L<sub>w</sub>−H) Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Presently, gas hydrates are being studied for their potential applications in technologies involving natural gas transportation, carbon dioxide sequestration, and component separation. In order to optimize their use, research has focused on finding hydrate-promoting agents and understanding how they work. One such promoter, multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWNTs), was found to enhance hydrate growth. The current study investigates the effects of adding plasma-functionalized hydrophilic MWNTs and as-produced hydrophobic MWNTs on the dissolution stage of methane hydrate formation. It was found that the addition of the hydrophilic MWNTs increased methane dissolution rates with an increase in MWNT loading. Furthermore, the hydrophobic MWNTs initially enhanced dissolution up until a concentration of 5 ppm, at which point the rates began to return to their nominal values. It was also found that the addition of either type of MWNT did not significantly affect the total number of moles of methane dissolved in the water.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".