MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321352823 · doi:10.1021/es5029074

Correlation of Chemical Evaporation Rate with Vapor Pressure

2014· article· en· W2321352823 on OpenAlexaff
Donald Mackay, Ian van Wesenbeeck

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvaporationVapor pressureChemistryCorrelation coefficientAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ThermodynamicsHydrocarbonEnvironmental chemistryOrganic chemistryMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new one-parameter correlation is developed for the evaporation rate (ER) of chemicals as a function of molar mass (M) and vapor pressure (P) that is simpler than existing correlations. It applies only to liquid surfaces that are unaffected by the underlying solid substrate as occurs in the standard ASTM evaporation rate test and to quiescent liquid pools. The relationship has a sounder theoretical basis than previous correlations because ER is correctly correlated with PM rather than P alone. The inclusion of M increases the slope of previous log ER versus log P regressions to a value close to 1.0 and yields a simpler one-parameter correlation, namely, ER (μg m(-1) h(-1)) = 1464P (Pa) × M (g mol(-1)). Applications are discussed for the screening level assessment and ranking of chemicals for evaporation rate, such as pesticides, fumigants, and hydrocarbon carrier fluids used in pesticide formulations, liquid consumer products used indoors, and accidental spills of liquids. The mechanistic significance of the single parameter as a mass-transfer coefficient or velocity is discussed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations93
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicIndoor Air Quality and Microbial ExposureFrench-language works237,207