MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362598272 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.00374

Effects of Poly(styrene/pentafluorostyrene-block-vinylpyrrolidone) Amphiphilic Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors on the Dynamic Viscosity of Methane Hydrate Systems at High-Pressure Driving Forces

2023· preprint· en· W4362598272 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chong Du, André Guerra, Adam McElligott, Milan Marić, Phillip Servio

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsCopolymerPolymer chemistryChemistryHydrateStyrenePolymerChemical engineeringAmphiphileChain transferAqueous solutionMaterials scienceRadical polymerizationOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reversible addition-fragmentation chain-transfer polymerization with a switchable chain-transfer agent was employed to synthesize amphiphilic block copolymers poly(styrene-b-vinylpyrrolidone) and poly(pentafluorostyrene-b-vinylpyrrolidone) at 10 wt.% hydrophobic content as kinetic hydrate inhibitors for methane hydrates. The dynamic viscosity of methane hydrate slurries was measured in a high-pressure rheometer up to 15 MPag. At 700 ppm of additives in aqueous media, the relative time for slurries to grow to 200 mPa s was 2.2-2.4 times longer than water reference values for the block copolymers. In contrast, it was only 1.3 for the poly(vinylpyrrolidone) homopolymer, demonstrating a reduced tendency for hydrate particle adhesion in block copolymer solutions. By increasing the concentration to 7000 ppm, however, the relative time only increased to 2.6-2.7. On the other hand, a block copolymer with 5 wt.% poly(pentafluorostyrene) block at 7000 ppm reached 3.5, which may indicate that the optimal hydrophobic content differs for each amphiphilic polymer and depends on monomer selection. No significant effect of polymer aggregation on hydrate growth was observed for the copolymers used in this study, which had the same hydrophobic percentage and molecular weights between 10,000 and 40,000 g/mol.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.154 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena→French-language works237,207→