MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333450794 · doi:10.1021/ef201860f

Experimental and Theoretical Determination of Equilibrium Interfacial Tension for the Solvent(s)–CO<sub>2</sub>–Heavy Oil Systems

2012· article· en· W2333450794 on OpenAlexaff
Huazhou Li, Daoyong Yang, Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistrySolventThermodynamicsSurface tensionDrop (telecommunication)Organic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equilibrium interfacial tension (IFT) between heavy oil and CO 2 with the addition of C 3 H 8 and/or n -C 4 H 10 has been experimentally and theoretically determined. Experimentally, an axisymmetric drop shape analysis (ADSA) technique is used to measure both the dynamic and equilibrium IFTs between heavy oil and three pure solvents (i.e., CO 2, C 3 H 8, and n -C 4 H 10 ) together with seven solvent mixtures. Theoretically, the Peng–Robinson equation of state (PR EOS) with a newly developed α function has been incorporated into a mechanistic parachor model to determine the equilibrium IFTs between heavy oil and pure solvents together with their corresponding mixtures. The addition of C 3 H 8 and/or n -C 4 H 10 into CO 2 stream leads to an obvious reduction of IFT between heavy oil and CO 2, although the degree of reduction depends upon the added amount of rich solvent(s). The mechanistic parachor model with the optimized parachor of the heavy oil and mass-transfer exponent provides a qualitative agreement with the measured equilibrium IFTs between solvent(s) and heavy oil in the liquid–vapor phase region.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations84
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207