MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3168024979

PARTIAL MOLAL VOLUME AND PARTIAL MOLAL ISENTROPIC COMPRESSIBILITY OF L-ISOLEUCINE IN AQUEOUS K2SO4, KNO3 AND KCL SOLUTIONS AT THE TEMPERATURES (303.15, 308.15, 313.15, 318.15 AND 323.15 K)

2012· article· en· W3168024979 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Riffat Basharat

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicThermodynamic properties of mixtures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolalityChemistryDilutionCompressibilityIsentropic processThermodynamicsAqueous solutionElectrolyteVolume (thermodynamics)Physical chemistryPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The apparent molal volume  (f ) apparent molal isentropic compressibility(f)of amino acid; L-isoleucine in aqueous solutions of 0.5Mfv) and ( K2SO4,1M KNO3 and 1.5M KCl have been calculated at several temperatures by using density and isentropic compressibility values. These  0fparameters values have been used to derive the apparent molal volume at infinite dilution i.e. partial molal volume, ( v ) and apparent molal  0fisentropic compressibility at infinite dilution i.e. partial molal compressibility, ( k ) for amino acid in the said aqueous solution of electrolytes. The  0fobserved  v values for the studied amino acid in aqueous electrolyte medium have been found to be larger in magnitude than those of corresponding values in water. The negative values with few positive apparent isentropic compressibility values have been found in all the system under investigation. The negative apparent isentropic compressibility values indicate that the water molecules around the amino acid molecules are less compressible than the water molecules in the bulk solvent. This behavior has been discussed in terms of electrostatic forces operative between zwitter-ions and ions of solutions.

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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of ChemistrySame topicThermodynamic properties of mixturesFrench-language works237,207