MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792925559 · doi:10.1002/ep.12886

Evolution of tar ball aggregates in Caspian Sea: Implications of connectionist tools linked with image analysis

2018· article· en· W2792925559 on OpenAlexaff
Javad Sayyad Amin, Esmat Mohamadi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Progress & Sustainable Energy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgglomeratetar (computing)Ball (mathematics)Artificial neural networkEnvironmental scienceBiological systemComputer scienceMaterials sciencePulp and paper industryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringComposite materialBiologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intensive petroleum activities in the Caspian Sea lead to a considerable oil pollution in the various parts of this region. Tar balls stranded on the south coast of the Caspian Sea evidently cause (and accelerate) this serious environmental threat. In this study, a poloxamine copolymeric surfactant is used to agglomerate tar balls in a system containing the solvent, antisolvent, and Caspian Sea tar balls. This research work is conducted to determine the cumulative size distribution of tar balls in the presence of a poloxamine copolymer. The evolution of tar ball aggregates is experimentally and theoretically investigated and the steady‐state size distribution of the tar balls is estimated by Back Propagation Artificial Neural Network (ANN‐BP) and a new evolutionary algorithm, called Imperialist Competitive Algorithm (ICA). The average size of tar ball aggregates increases with time and reaches a maximum value. It then declines and eventually approaches a steady‐state condition so that an almost constant size for the particles is attained. The statistical analysis shows a good agreement between the predicted values (obtained by the neural network combined with ICA, known as ANN‐ICA) and the real data for the steady‐state size distribution of the aggregates. This research study can considerably help to further understand evolution of tar balls (that hit the beaches) and consequently to find effective and economical ways for tar balls removal from the beaches. © 2018 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 37: 1901–1907, 2018

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.749

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Progress & Sustainable EnergySame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207