MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904240691 · doi:10.1063/1.5048188

Degradation in cone-plate rheometry

2018· article· en· W2904240691 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Jeffrey Giacomin, P. H. Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRheometerDegradation (telecommunications)BlanketingOxygenLimiting oxygen concentrationMaterials scienceNitrogenMechanicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryComposite materialRheologyPhysicsChromatographyComputer scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze quantitatively the oxidative degradation of a sample in a cone-plate rheometer, as oxygen diffuses inward, radially, from the free boundary. We examine rheometer error mitigation by means of nitrogen blanketing, and also, of cone-plate partitioning. We arrive at exact analytical expressions for the oxygen concentration, and thus, for the degradation rate. We then integrate this rate over time to get the amount of oxygen reacted as a function of radial position and time in the degrading sample. To illustrate the usefulness of our analytical expressions, we provide two worked examples investigating the effect of nitrogen blanketing and cone-plate partitioning. We find that, though nitrogen blanketing always produces less degradation, its benefits are limited for short times. Additionally, cone-plate partitioning provides a simpler solution and allows samples to be run for longer times without degradation compromising measurement, even in samples initially saturated with oxygen. We close by considering the effect of antioxidants.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207