MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604122442 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22853

Explicit Frost‐Kalkwarf type equations for calculation of vapour pressure of liquids from triple to critical point by the Adomian decomposition method

2017· article· en· W2604122442 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hooman Fatoorehchi, Randolph Rach, Hossein Sakhaeinia

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdomian decomposition methodPredictabilityFrost (temperature)MathematicsDiagonalApplied mathematicsDecompositionPoint (geometry)ComputationMathematical analysisStatisticsDifferential equationAlgorithmMeteorologyChemistryPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The general form of explicit, analytical solution of the Frost‐Kalkwarf equation was developed for the first time by means of the Adomian decomposition method as a reliable mathematical tool. The accuracy of the obtained formulas was further improved by applying the diagonal Padé approximants. We have demonstrated that our developed formulas are at least 30 times faster than the original Frost‐Kalkwarf equation in computation of vapour pressures and are highly accurate with an overall absolute relative deviation of 2.25 % for 88 different substances over 26 400 experimental data points from triple to critical point temperatures. As another unique advantage, our formulas avoid any divergent behaviour in using iterative methods unlike the implicit Frost‐Kalkwarf equation. Based on the conducted statistical analyses, our formulas have excellent predictability of vapour pressure values with a probability of 90.33 % for absolute relative errors of less than 5 %.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207