Aqueous nonelectrolyte solutions. Part XVI. Formula of deuterium sulfide D-hydrate and its dissociation thermodynamic functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method has been devised to approximate both the hydrate formula number n and the standard thermodynamic functions for hydrate dissociation from the temperature change of the hydrate former fugacity along a univariant three-phase (hl1g) equilibrium line. Thermodynamic equations are derived, their validity discussed, and an iterative method for their solution is described. The univariant (hl1g) equilibrium dissociation of deuterium sulfide D-hydrate (D2S·nD2O phase h) into gaseous deuterium sulfide (g) and liquid deuterium oxide (l1) has been treated to give approximate formulae and dissociation constants at 58 temperatures from 2.798 to 30.666°C. Dissociation equilibrium constants Kp(h–> l1g) have been represented as a function of temperature by a four-parameter equation which yields both values and standard errors (i) for ΔHot(h–> l1g) and ΔCpot(h–> l1g) the standard enthalpy and heat capacity changes for D-hydrate dissociation and (ii) for n = r the approximate formula number of the D-hydrate at each experimental temperature. The formula D2S·6.115D2O with standard error 0.018D2O is found for deuterium sulfide D-hydrate at lower quadruple point Q(hs1l1g) 3.392°C; an approximate formula D2S·5.840D2O with SE 0.019D2O is found at upper quadruple point Q(hs1l2g) 30.770°C. Key words: clathrate D-hydrate of deuterium sulfide, deuterium sulfide D-hyfrate, formula of deuterium sulfide D-hydrate, thermodynamics of clathrate hydrate dissociation, dissociation equilibrium constant of deuterium sulfide D-hydrate, standard enthalpy, and heat capacity changes for dissociation of deuterium sulfide D-hydrate.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".