Hybrid connectionist model determines CO2–oil swelling factor
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In-depth understanding of interactions between crude oil and CO 2 provides insight into the CO 2 -based enhanced oil recovery (EOR) process design and simulation. When CO 2 contacts crude oil, the dissolution process takes place. This phenomenon results in the oil swelling, which depends on the temperature, pressure, and composition of the oil. The residual oil saturation in a CO 2 -based EOR process is inversely proportional to the oil swelling factor. Hence, it is important to estimate this influential parameter with high precision. The current study suggests the predictive model based on the least-squares support vector machine (LS-SVM) to calculate the CO 2 -oil swelling factor. A genetic algorithm is used to optimize hyperparameters (c and r 2 ) of the LS-SVM model. This model showed a high coefficient of determination (R 2 = 0.9953) and a low value for the mean-squared error (MSE = 0.0003) based on the available experimental data while estimating the CO 2 -oil swelling factor. It was found that LS-SVM is a straightforward and accurate method to determine the CO 2 -oil swelling factor with negligible uncertainty. This method can be incorporated in commercial reservoir simulators to include the effect of the CO 2 -oil swelling factor when adequate experimental data are not available.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it