MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753774500 · doi:10.1063/1.4990134

An automated system for performing continuous viscosity <i>versus</i> temperature measurements of fluids using an Ostwald viscometer

2017· article· en· W2753774500 on OpenAlexafffund
Luc Beaulieu, E. R. Logan, Kevin L. Gering, J. R. Dahn

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsViscometerViscosityMaterials scienceElectrolyteThermodynamicsVolume (thermodynamics)Ethylene glycolUbbelohde viscometerAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MechanicsComposite materialChemistryChromatographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An automated system was developed to measure the viscosity of fluids as a function of temperature using image analysis tracking software. An Ostwald viscometer was placed in a three-wall dewar in which ethylene glycol was circulated using a thermal bath. The system collected continuous measurements during both heating and cooling cycles exhibiting no hysteresis. The use of video tracking analysis software greatly reduced the measurement errors associated with measuring the time required for the meniscus to pass through the markings on the viscometer. The stability of the system was assessed by performing 38 consecutive measurements of water at 42.50 ± 0.05 °C giving an average flow time of 87.7 ± 0.3 s. A device was also implemented to repeatedly deliver a constant volume of liquid of 11.00 ± 0.03 ml leading to an average error in the viscosity of 0.04%. As an application, the system was used to measure the viscosity of two Li-ion battery electrolyte solvents from approximately 10 to 40 °C with results showing excellent agreement with viscosity values calculated using Gering's Advanced Electrolyte Model (AEM).

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)0.002
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.796

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207