MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thermal Conversion Modeling of Visbreaking at Temperatures below 400 °C

2020· article· en· W3092377749 on OpenAlexaff
Arno de Klerk

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomolysisChemistryThermodynamicsDissociation (chemistry)ThermalContext (archaeology)CrackingHeat transferBond cleavagePhysical chemistryRadicalOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is in honor of Michael (Mike) T. Klein, and his contributions to the modeling of thermal conversion are highlighted within the context of this study. The question that was posed is whether thermal conversion models developed for conventional visbreaking (430–490 °C) are adequate for the description of visbreaking at lower temperatures? This topic is relevant to partial upgrading of bitumen by visbreaking at temperatures of <400 °C. Insights from thermal conversion performed at 100–430 °C were employed to revisit the description of the free radical chemistry and how temperature affected the relative importance of thermal reactions. With a decreasing temperature, the increasing contribution of reactions, such as molecule-induced homolysis and the presence of “persistent” free radical species in the feed, results in a higher free radical concentration than is predicted by initiation through thermally induced homolytic bond dissociation. With a decreasing temperature, transfer reactions are also increasing in relative importance. This affects propagation and termination reactions. One of the important consequences of the increased contribution of transfer reactions at lower temperatures is that the apparent activation energy of cracking is reduced. The threshold temperature below which conventional visbreaking models no longer provide an adequate description of conversion is 380–400 °C. Drawing on the differences that must be captured to model low-temperature thermal conversion, it was shown that the development work by Mike Klein provided a solid basis for such modeling. Of particular importance is the ability to incorporate reactive intermediates that include radical isomers and to model transfer reactions. Quantitative structure–reactivity relationships captured the essence of the chemistry that must be reflected to model low-temperature thermal conversion.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207