Charging behaviour at the carbonate rock‐water interface in low‐salinity waterflooding: Estimation of zeta potential in high‐salinity brines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The study of zeta potential using electro‐kinetic analyzers that measure streaming potential has limitations of measurements to relatively low ionic strength solutions (<0.1 mol/L) due to the threshold limit of streaming potential signal above a certain limit of ionic strength. The objective of this study is to indirectly estimate the zeta potential for higher salinity brine using the zeta potential measurements for low salinity brine, develop an understanding of electrostatic shielding as predicted by the electric double layer (EDL) model, and overcome the limitation of the apparatus. Zeta potential become less negative as ionic strength increases, as per the Gouy–Chapman–Stern theory. It explains the suppression of electro‐kinetic phenomena due to the gradual compression of the diffuse layer. Our calculations show that the zeta potential and the Debye length become nearly constant at higher ionic strength. The ability to estimate zeta potential by the Gouy‐Chapman‐Stern theory at increasing ionic strength is limited. This theory predicts that the concentration of counter‐ions in the Stern layer increases with increasing ionic strength of the brine until the surface charge becomes neutralized and the diffuse layer collapses. However, it ignores the spatial extension of ions. It considers them as a point charge and may not accurately predict the zeta potential at higher ionic strength. The extent of diffuse layer compression is thus limited to the size of the hydrated counter‐ion. It is very unlikely that the measured zeta potential will become zero at higher ionic strength of brines and our calculations show the same.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".