Composition dependence of cyclohexane‐extracted gangue drying at ambient conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The drying of residue cyclohexane in a series of reconstituted gangue samples at ambient conditions was studied. The reconstituted gangue samples contained controlled amounts of residual bitumen, water, and fines (solid particles <45 μm). Regardless of the gangue composition, the initial drying flux was constant, and more than 90% of the residual cyclohexane was removed in this stage. The initial drying was driven by the liquid film flow induced by the differences in liquid film's radii of curvature along the pore channels. The liquid was a diluted bitumen solution that was transported to the surface, where cyclohexane evaporated with a rate comparable to that of pure cyclohexane evaporation. Upon the solvent evaporation, the dissolved bitumen was deposited on the sample surface. The residual bitumen content exerted an adverse effect on the initial drying flux because the dissolved bitumen significantly increased the solution viscosity, thereby reducing the liquid film flow rate. There existed an optimum water content range (3.9‐6.0 wt%) that facilitated the formation of bitumen solution film in the pores, favouring drying. When there was a high concentration of water or no water, the initial drying flux was decreased remarkably. The initial drying flux was insensitive to the fines content. Adding fines may have two counteracting effects on the drying process. Fines decreased the mean pore size, thereby lowering the liquid film flow rate. However, the hydrophobicity of the pore surfaces was increased as fines are usually covered by asphaltenes. This favours liquid film formation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".