MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermodynamic Modeling of Chiral Compounds Solubility Using Correlative and Predictive Models

2015· article· en· W2329945655 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Morteza Salimi, Bahman ZareNezhad, Hossein Fakhraian, Ebrahim Choobdari

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Solution Chemistry and Modeling · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUNIQUACNon-random two-liquid modelUNIFACSolubilityChemistryThermodynamicsActivity coefficientIntermolecular forceSolventOrganic chemistryAqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many intermolecular forces and parameters affect the solubility of a compound in a solvent. Various thermodynamic models are presented to predict these parameters and determine solid liquid equilibrium data. By selecting suitable thermodynamic model for solubility modeling, calculation error is reduced and the results will be closer to the experimental data. Herein, the ability of two predictive and two correlative models in solubility modeling of chiral compounds is investigated. Thus, solubility of pure and racemic forms of chiral Ketamine, Mandelic acid and 3-Chloromandelic acid is evaluated using UNIQUAC and NRTL models. The solubility modeling of pure and racemic forms of Ketamine in Ethanol is also determined by UNIFAC and NRTL-SAC models. There are good agreement between experimental data and results of NRTL and UNIQUAC models. Predictive NRTL-SAC model shows smaller deviation than UNIFAC in solubility determination of pure and racemic form of Ketamine.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Solution Chemistry and ModelingSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207