Non-Equilibrium Interactions Between Heavy Oil and Liquid Propane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, we use a custom-designed visual cell to investigate nonequilibrium interactions between liquid propane (C3(1)) and a heavy oil sample (7.2°API) at 55°C. The heavy oil sample is taken from Clearwater Formation located in Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB). We inject C3(1) into the visual cell containing the heavy oil sample (pressure buildup process) and allow the injected C3(1) to interact with the oil sample (soaking process). After the pressure buildup process, we observe three phases in the visual cell: 1) heavy oil (0.67 mol), 2) liquid C3 (C3(1),0.60 mol), and gaseous C3 (C3(g), 0.20 mol). We measure visual-cell pressure and observe the C3-heavy oil interactions during the pressure buildup and soaking processes. Nonequilibrium interactions occurring at the interfaces of C3(1)-heavy oil and C3(1)-C3(g) are recorded over time. The results show that complete mixing of heavy oil with C3(1) occurs in two stages. First, upward extracting flow of hydrocarbon components from bulk heavy oil phase toward C3(1) phase form a distinguished layer (L1) during the soaking process. The extracted oil components become denser over time and move down (draining flows) towards the C3(1)-heavy oil interface due to gravity. The gradual color change of L1 from colorless to black suggests the mixing of hydrocarbon components from heavy oil. After L1 becomes homogenous, a second layer (L2) is formed at the upper part of the bulk C3(1) phase (above L1). Extracting and draining flows becomes active once again, leading to mixing of oil components from L1 into L2. At equilibrium condition, heavy oil and C3(1) are completely mixed and form a single homogenous phase.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".