MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246297357 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14662416.v1

Experimental diffusivity and solubility of carbon dioxide and nitrogen in polyproplene

2021· preprint· en· W4246297357 on OpenAlexafffund
Pawan Kundra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Innovation TrustWayne State University
KeywordsThermal diffusivitySolubilityCarbon dioxideNitrogenDiffusionThermodynamicsWork (physics)ChemistryMass transferPolypropyleneMass diffusivityAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Organic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we determined the concentration-dependent diffusivity and solubility of environmentally benign blowing agents, carbon dioxide and nitrogen in polypropylene. For this purpose, experiments were carried out to obtain pressure decay data in the range 170-190°C and 0.29-7.32 MPa. For each experimental run, the mass of gas absorbed as a function of time led to the calculation of diffusion coefficient. The equilibrium pressure at sufficiently long time enabled the calculation of solubility. The calculus of variation was used to establish the necessary conditions for the determination of concentration-dependent diffusivity such that the model-predicted mass of gas absorbed in polymer matches with the experimental counterpart. The value of diffusivity was found to lie in the ranges 2.67-9.13xlO-9 and 3.88-12.94xlO-9 m2 S- I for carbon dioxide and nitrogen, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolymer Foaming and CompositesFrench-language works237,207