MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991006719 · doi:10.1002/ceat.201900096

Evolving an Accurate Decision Tree‐Based Model for Predicting Carbon Dioxide Solubility in Polymers

2019· article· en· W2991006719 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Engineering & Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolubilityPolymerDecision treeCompatibility (geochemistry)Boosting (machine learning)Carbon dioxideGradient boostingComputer scienceProcess engineeringChemistryMaterials scienceThermodynamicsBiological systemMachine learningOrganic chemistryRandom forestEngineeringPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Solubility is one of the most indispensable physicochemical properties determining the compatibility of components of a blending system. Research has been focused on the solubility of carbon dioxide in polymers as a significant application of green chemistry. To replace costly and time‐consuming experiments, a novel solubility prediction model based on a decision tree, called the stochastic gradient boosting algorithm, was proposed to predict CO 2 solubility in 13 different polymers, based on 515 published experimental data lines. The results indicate that the proposed ensemble model is an effective method for predicting the CO 2 solubility in various polymers, with highly satisfactory performance and high efficiency. It produces more accurate outputs than other methods such as machine learning schemes and an equation of state approach.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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