Predicting Viscosities of Heavy Oils and Solvent–Heavy Oil Mixtures Using Artificial Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the potential of artificial neural networks (ANNs) to accurately predict viscosities of heavy oils (HOs) as well as mixtures of solvents and heavy oils (S–HOs). The study uses experimental data collected from the public domain for HO viscosities (involving 20 HOs and 568 data points) and S–HO mixture viscosities (involving 12 solvents and 4057 data points) for a wide range of temperatures, pressures, and mass fractions. The natural logarithm of viscosity (instead of viscosity itself) is used as predictor and response variables for the ANNs to significantly improve model performance. Gaps in HO viscosity data (with respect to pressure or temperature) are filled using either the existing correlations or ANN models that innovatively use viscosity ratios from the available data. HO viscosities and mixture viscosities (weight-based, molar-based, and volume-based) from the trained ANN models are found to be more accurate than those from commonly used empirical correlations and mixing rules. The trained ANN model also fares well for another dataset of condensate-diluted HOs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".