MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vibrational Spectroscopy and Thermophysical Properties of Ultralow Sulfur Diesel—Alternative Fuel Binary Blends

2017· article· en· W2768537764 on OpenAlexafffund
Thiago Petrucci, Kirk H. Michaelian, Rafał Gieleciak, Jun Shen, Jianqin Zhou, Caikang Gu, W. Stuart Neill, Mauro Luciano Baesso, L. C. Malacarne, Nelson G. C. Astrath

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiodiesel Production and Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsDiesel fuelBinary numberSulfurSpectroscopyMaterials scienceThermodynamicsChemical engineeringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryOrganic chemistryPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four alternative fuels (AF) were blended with ultralow sulfur diesel (ULSD) at five different proportions (10, 20, 30, 50, and 100 vol % AF) to create 20 binary mixtures in this work. Two renewable jet AFs and two renewable diesel AFs were investigated. Interactions between the components in the mixtures were analyzed by means of spectroscopy (Raman, near-infrared), thermophysical (thermal diffusivity, thermo-optic coefficient), and physical (density) techniques. Correlations among the data were investigated using principal component analysis and partial least-squares regression. Trends in Raman intensities and band positions as well as thermophysical properties showed that the AF/ULSD blends resembled two-component mixtures despite the known complexities of the constituents. Specifically, spectra combined according to the percentages of the components in each mixture; thermophysical and physical properties exhibited similar behavior. The spectra showed strong correlations with all three physical properties, creating the possibility for predicting the properties of similar AF/ULSD mixtures. These properties are governed by the chemical compositions of the fuels.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicBiodiesel Production and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207