MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2333890282 · doi:10.1021/ef101591j

Impact of Pre-equilibration on the Assessment Methodology of Interfacial Tension Measured between Aqueous and Heavy Oil Phases

2011· article· en· W2333890282 on OpenAlexaff
M. Sharath Chandra, Jose Zacharia, Géza Horváth‐Szabó

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsSchlumberger (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface tensionDrop (telecommunication)ChemistryPulmonary surfactantAqueous solutionAqueous two-phase systemPhase (matter)ThermodynamicsTolueneAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Carbon chainChemical engineeringChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Equilibrium interfacial tension (IFT) between toluene-diluted bitumen and a series of alkyltrimethylammonium bromide surfactant solutions was measured at various temperatures as a function of the carbon chain length of surfactants. A mixing and separating protocol to pre-equilibrate the aqueous and organic phases was introduced prior to the measurements. The influence of the equilibrated phase densities on the IFT values obtained by the pendant drop method is discussed. A possible systematic error in the assessment of the IFT values with the pendant drop and spinning drop methodologies was pointed out. In general, bitumen–aqueous phase IFTs increase with an increase in the temperature and decrease with an increase in the carbon chain length of the surfactants. During the equilibration process of the bitumen and aqueous phases, the phase densities change significantly, which has implications on the gravity drainage process.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & Fuels→Same topicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques→French-language works237,207→