Catode and Anode Processes in Sulfur Corrosion Destruction of Metal Constructions of Prolonged Exploitation in an Aggressive Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The analysis of the literature and the practical data show that the existing scientific and technical and technological developments concerning the provision of reliable cross-mechanical stability and durability of the pipelines of the oil and gas industry are largely contradictory and uncertain; there was a need for a systematic study of the causes, conditions and mechanisms of corrosion damage of long-term equipment, features of cathodic and anodic processes in hydrogen sulfide destruction, in particular sulfur-hydrogen metal degradation. From the analysis of corrosion processes, we can draw the following conclusions: a) corrosion always destroys the anode, i.e. the electrode with a more negative potential; b) the cathode is not destroyed by corrosion and there is a process of depolarization, that is the removal of electrons; c) during hydrogen depolarization, electrons are neutralized by hydrogen ions and hydrogen gas is released from the cathode surface; d) during oxygen depolarization, the electrons are removed by oxygen dissolved in the electrolyte, which enters from the air or together with the environment; e) depolarization leads to a significant convergence of the values of the potentials of the electrodes and reduce the corrosion rate. Despite the large number of literature sources describing the experimental works, there is no single view of the mechanism of cathode and anode processes in the hydrogen sulfide degradation of oil and gas pipelines. This is explained by the multiplicity of factors affecting this mechanism, the complexity and insufficient study of individual elementary physicochemical processes, and therefore requires additional theoretical and experimental studies
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) | 0.001 | 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".