MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Can a Cubic Equation of State Model Bitumen–Solvent Phase Behavior?

2017· article· en· W2724996013 on OpenAlexafffund
Kimberly Johnston, Marco A. Satyro, Shawn D. Taylor, Harvey W. Yarranton

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaVirtual Materials GroupPetrobrasChina National Offshore Oil CorporationSuncor Energy Incorporated
KeywordsAsphaltenevan der Waals forceThermodynamicsNon-random two-liquid modelMixing (physics)ChemistrySaturation (graph theory)SolventEquation of stateYield (engineering)PentaneFlory–Huggins solution theoryCombining rulesBinary numberActivity coefficientOrganic chemistryMathematicsMoleculeAqueous solutionPhysicsPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cubic equations of state (CEoS), such as the advanced Peng–Robinson (APR) EoS, are convenient for use in commercial simulators and have successfully fit saturation pressures and asphaltene onset points for bitumen–solvent systems using simple quadratic mixing rules. However, this approach does not accurately predict asphaltene precipitation yields. In this study, the APR EoS with several sets of asymmetric mixing rules is evaluated against saturation pressure and asphaltene yield data for n -pentane diluted bitumen. The asymmetric van der Waals, Sandoval et al., and two forms of Huron–Vidal mixing rules with an NRTL (non-random liquid theory) activity coefficient model are considered. The use of asymmetric mixing rules significantly improves the match to asphaltene yield data; however, the yields are still underpredicted at high solvent contents, and the tuning parameters that give the best match for asphaltene yield data are not predictive or easily correlated for other solvents. The APR EoS with symmetric van der Waals mixing rules is also evaluated with compositionally dependent binary interaction parameters. The use of compositionally dependent solvent/asphaltene binary interaction parameters allows the model to fit asphaltene yield data over the entire composition range. A set of interaction parameters is recommended that fits both asphaltene yield and saturation pressure data. The merits of this methodology as a practical option for modeling heavy oil–solvent behavior are discussed.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations25
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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