MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325275640 · doi:10.1021/je301326t

Large Bubbles Reduce the Surface Sorption Artifact of the Inert Gas Stripping Method

2013· article· en· W2325275640 on OpenAlexaff
Chubashini Shunthirasingham, Xiaoshu Cao, Ying Duan Lei, Frank Wania

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical & Engineering Data · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)SorptionInert gasInertStripping (fiber)Materials scienceAdsorptionChemistryComputer scienceComposite materialArtificial intelligencePhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate Henry’s law constants between air and water ( H ) are crucial for understanding a chemical’s environmental behavior. During inert gas stripping (IGS) H is derived from the rate of a chemical’s disappearance from aqueous solution as a result of air bubbling through a water-filled column. While H of many semivolatile organic compounds has been measured by IGS, inconsistent results between different studies have been attributed to chemical adsorption to the bubble surface. This surface adsorption artifact is expected to increase with a chemical’s interface–air partition coefficient ( K IA ) and decreasing bubble size. Previous work with normal alkanols of variable chain length identified a K IA threshold of approximately 0.001 m, above which IGS is compromised by the surface sorption artifact. In this study, we repeated IGS measurements of H of normal alkanols at different temperatures of 298.15 K, 305.65 K, 323.15 K, and 343.15 K using a modified gas inlet mechanisms that results in the formation of large bubbles (diameter approximately 5.5 mm). The new H values agreed very well with those measured with a head space technique that is much less susceptible to surface adsorption. The method is judged suitable for measuring H of surface active chemicals with K IA values below 0.02 m .

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical & Engineering DataSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207