MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fractionation of Asphaltenes in Understanding Their Role in Petroleum Emulsion Stability and Fouling

2016· article· en· W2564986322 on OpenAlexafffund
Peiqi Qiao, David Harbottle, Plamen Tchoukov, Jacob H. Masliyah, Johan Sjöblom, Qingxia Liu, Zhenghe Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta InnovatesNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsAsphalteneFractionationAdsorptionChemistryEmulsionSolubilityPetroleumChemical engineeringCrude oilChromatographyDispersantSolvophobicOrganic chemistryMoleculeDispersion (optics)Petroleum engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SARA fractionation separates crude oil into fractions of saturates (S), aromatics (A), resins (R), and asphaltenes (A) based on the differences in their polarizability and polarity. Defined as a solubility class, asphaltenes are normally considered as a nuisance in the petroleum industry mainly as a result of their problematic precipitation and adsorption at oil–water and oil–solid interfaces. Because a broad range of molecules fall within the group of asphaltenes with distinct sizes and structures, considering the asphaltenes as a whole was noted to limit the deep understanding of governing mechanisms in asphaltene-induced problems. Extended-SARA (E-SARA) is proposed as a concept of asphaltene fractionation according to their interfacial activities and adsorption characteristics, providing critical information to correlate specific functional groups with certain characteristics of asphaltene aggregation, precipitation, and adsorption. Such knowledge is essential to addressing asphaltene-related problems by targeting specific subfractions of asphaltenes.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations128
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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