MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388833287 · doi:10.1080/1062936x.2023.2280634

Metrics for estimating vapour pressure deviation from ideality in binary mixtures

2023· article· en· W4388833287 on OpenAlexaff
Alena K.D. Celsie, J. Mark Parnis, Trevor N. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueSAR and QSAR in environmental research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative structure–activity relationshipMean squared errorVapor pressureThermodynamicsBinary numberHenry's lawChemistryMolecular descriptorStandard deviationSimilarity (geometry)Absolute deviationMathematicsStatisticsPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryStereochemistryArtificial intelligenceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel method is introduced for estimating the degree of interactions occurring between two different compounds in a binary mixture resulting in deviations from ideality as predicted by Raoult’s law. Metrics of chemical similarity between binary mixture components were used as descriptors and correlated with the Root-Mean Square Error (RMSE) associated with Raoult’s law calculations of total vapour pressure prediction, including Abraham descriptors, sigma moments, and several chemical properties. The best correlation was for a quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) equation using differences in Abraham parameters as descriptors (r2 = 0.7585), followed by a QSAR using differences in COSMO-RS sigma moment descriptors (r2 = 0.7461), and third by a QSAR using differences in the chemical properties of log KAW, melting point, and molecular weight as descriptors (r2 = 0.6878). Of these chemical properties, Δlog KAW had the strongest correlation with deviation from Raoult’s law (RMSE) and this property alone resulted in an r2 of 0.6630. These correlations are useful for assessing the expected deviation in Raoult’s law estimations of vapour pressures, a key property for estimating inhalation exposure.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueSAR and QSAR in environmental researchSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207