MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993074057 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23695

Solubility of propane in <i>N</i>‐formyl morpholine

2019· article· en· W2993074057 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fang‐Yuan Jou, Alan E. Mather, Kurt A. G. Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolubilityPropaneChemistryMethaneHydrocarbonSolventMorpholineHenry's lawCarbon dioxideThermodynamicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract N‐formyl morpholine (NFM) is a solvent that has been used to separate acid gases from gas streams. An advantage of NFM is the high solubility of acid gases compared with the low solubility of light hydrocarbons. The solubility of the light hydrocarbons in NFM is important, as the hydrocarbons constitute a loss to the process, and result in hydrocarbon emissions to the atmosphere. However, there are only a few experimental data sets dealing with the solubility of hydrocarbons in NFM. To provide data to be used in the design of plants in the natural gas processing industry, the solubility of propane (C3H8) in NFM was measured at 298.15, 313.15, and 343.15 K at pressures up to 20.15 MPa. The Peng‐Robinson equation of state was employed to correlate the experimental data and to obtain binary interaction parameters. The binary interaction parameters were used to obtain the parameters of the Krichevsky‐Ilinskaya equation and Henry's law constants for propane were calculated. Henry's law constants for propane were compared with those of hydrogen sulphide, carbon dioxide, methane, and ethane in NFM.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207