MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deriving the Molecular Composition of Vacuum Distillates by Integrating Statistical Modeling and Detailed Hydrocarbon Characterization

2015· article· en· W2342621855 on OpenAlexafffund
Anton Alvarez‐Majmutov, Rafał Gieleciak, Jinwen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsDistillationHydrocarbonFluid catalytic crackingVacuum distillationChemistryCrackingRefining (metallurgy)Monte Carlo methodHydrocarbon mixturesPetroleumProcess engineeringOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterization of the chemical composition of petroleum vacuum distillate fractions is essential to advance the understanding of the fundamental chemistry of refining processes, such as fluid catalytic cracking and hydrocracking. This is a challenging task, primarily as a result of the limitations of current analytical techniques to deal with heavy hydrocarbon samples. A different path toward this goal is through the use of hydrocarbon composition modeling techniques to derive the molecular make up of petroleum fractions with limited analytical data. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate this approach for simulating the molecular composition of vacuum distillates. The method consists of generating a computational mixture of representative hydrocarbon molecules that mimics the properties of an actual oil sample. Molecules are built according to the specific chemistry of vacuum distillates with a Monte Carlo algorithm, and the abundance of each molecule is optimized by entropy maximization. The model was applied to simulate two vacuum gas oil samples differing substantially in chemical composition and geographic origin. The samples were experimentally characterized in detail to obtain the necessary model inputs. Simulations revealed that the model adequately predicts the analytical properties and carbon number distributions of the two samples, proving its capability to capture a wide range of distinct vacuum distillate chemistries.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207