MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214950110 · doi:10.3390/polym14051004

Viscoelastic Behavior of Crude Oil-Gum Emulsions in Enhanced Oil Recovery

2022· article· en· W4214950110 on OpenAlexaff
Mamdouh T. Ghannam, Mohamed Y.E. Selim, Abdulrazag Y. Zekri, Nabil Esmail

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymers · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXanthan gumViscoelasticityRheometerEmulsionCreepMaterials scienceChromatographyRheologyComposite materialChemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The experimental study of the Creep-recovery examination is necessary to understand the viscoelastic behavior of crude oil-Xanthan gum emulsions. The experimental measurements and analysis of these tests were completed using RheoStress RS100 under controlled stress CS-mode. Rheometers with CS-mode allow for a useful and direct technique for the experimental measurements of creep and recovery stages. This investigation covers a wide range of crude oil concentration of 0–75% by volume, Xanthan concentration range of 0–104 ppm, and two types of Xanthan gums are used and investigated. The creep-recovery measurements of crude oil-Xanthan gums emulsions were extensively investigated. It was important to find the linear viscoelastic range for the examined crude oil-Xanthan gum emulsions. The experimental measurements and analysis of the creep-recovery examinations showed that the linear viscoelastic range was up to 1 Pa. The experimental investigation showed that the higher the concentration of the used gum and crude oil, the lower the compliance of the emulsions. For the Xanthan concentrations of less than 103 ppm, the crude oil-gum emulsion exhibited viscous behavior. However, for the Xanthan concentration of higher than 103, the examined emulsions displayed viscoelastic behavior.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymersSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207