MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247990488 · doi:10.1021/je300813c

Enthalpy of Solution of Carbon Dioxide in Aqueous Solutions of Triethanolamine at Temperatures of 322.5 K and 372.9 K and Pressures up to 5 MPa

2012· article· en· W4247990488 on OpenAlexaff
Hugues Arcis, Karine Ballerat‐Busserolles, Laurence Rodier, Jean Yves Coxam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical & Engineering Data · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryTriethanolamineDiethanolamineAqueous solutionEnthalpySolubilityEnthalpy change of solutionCarbon dioxideThermodynamicsStandard enthalpy of formationCalorimetryAlkanolamineInorganic chemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The enthalpies of solution (Δ sol H ) of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in two aqueous solutions ( w = 0.1500 and w = 0.3000) of triethanolamine (TEA) have been measured for the first time at T = 322.5 K and 372.9 K and p up to 5 MPa, by flow calorimetry. Enthalpies of solution of CO 2 (Δ sol H ) have been obtained as function of loading α (mol CO 2 ·mol amine –1 ). Solubility data ( s ) of the gas into the solution were also determined. Influences of temperature, pressure, and absorbent composition have been discussed. Our experimental enthalpies of solution have been compared with data derived from a thermodynamic model of phase equilibria based on a γ–ϕ approach. The enthalpy of solution of CO 2 in aqueous solutions of methyldiethanolamine (MDEA), monoethanolamine (MEA), and diethanolamine (DEA) have been compared to the present results to discuss the effects of the hindrance on the nitrogen nucleus as well as its degree of substitution, on the enthalpy of solution.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical & Engineering DataSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207