Reference Correlations for the Viscosity of 13 Inorganic Molten Salts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1988, reference correlations for the viscosity of a selection of molten inorganic salts were proposed by Janz and have been used extensively. During the last 31 years, many additional measurements have been published. In a very recent paper, new reference correlations for the thermal conductivity of 13 inorganic molten salts were proposed. In this paper, reference correlations for the viscosity of those same salts are proposed. All available experimental data for the viscosity of 13 inorganic molten salts have been critically examined with the intention of establishing improved or new reference viscosity correlations. All experimental data have been categorized into primary and secondary data according to the quality of measurement specified by a series of criteria. Standard reference correlations are proposed for the following molten salts (with estimated uncertainties at the 95% confidence level given in parentheses): LiNO3 (6.7%), NaNO3 (3.0%), KNO3 (3.0%), NaBr (1.6%), KBr (2.0%), RbBr (2.2%), LiCl (3.7%), NaCl (2.4%), KCl (1.6%), RbCl (3.6%), CsCl (1.1%), NaI (1.5%), and RbI (1.5%).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".