MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892827686 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23346

Experimental methods in chemical engineering: Differential scanning calorimetry—DSC

2018· article· en· W2892827686 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
Topicthermodynamics and calorimetric analyses
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDifferential scanning calorimetryThermodynamicsThermopileHeat fluxAdiabatic processCalorimetryChemistryHeat transferHeat transfer coefficientIsothermal processHeat capacityMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Differential calorimetry assesses energy flow between a sample and its environment. The sample may be heated at a known heating rate (either constant or temperature modulated), or held in an isothermal environment or adiabatic environment depending on instrument and experimental design. The subset of differential calorimetry that deals with known heating or cooling rates is termed differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and is a foundational technique to modern thermodynamics. It reports the heat flow versus temperature or time from which we calculate specific heat capacity at constant pressure, , enthalpy of fusion, and the heat of reaction. Moreover, it identifies how microstuctural properties evolve and thermal arrests—a characteristic of phase transitions. Heat‐flux DSCs measure the temperature difference between a reference and a sample that sit on a thin two‐dimensional plate. Power compensated DSCs heat reference material and the sample in independent furnaces while maintaining each at the same temperature. The Tian‐Calvet DSC is similar to the heat‐flux DSC, but minimizes error induced at high temperature with ring shaped thermopiles that surround the reference and the sample and in most designs incorporate the independent furnaces characteristic of heat flux DSC (three‐dimensional heat flow probe). Convection and radiation energy leaks compromise accuracy above 600 , particularly for pan‐style heat flux and power‐compensated DSC, which are sensitive to heat transfer by conduction only. The Tian‐Calvet DSC maximizes the signal‐to‐noise ratio by enveloping the sample and reference in the thermopile. Web of Science indexed 11 800 articles in 2016 and 2017 that mentioned DSC and assigned 789 to chemical engineering, which ranks it 5th after polymer science, material science, physical chemistry, and multi‐disciplinary chemistry. A bibliometric analysis recognizes four research clusters: polymers and nano‐composites, alloys and kinetics, nano‐particles and drug delivery, and fibres.

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 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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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