Comparing Antoine parameter sources for accurate vapor pressure prediction across a range of temperatures
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining the vapor pressure of a substance at the relevant process temperature is a key component in conducting an exposure assessment to ascertain worker exposure. However, vapor pressure data at various temperatures relevant to the work environment is not readily available for many chemicals. The Antoine equation is a mathematical expression that relates temperature and vapor pressure. The objective of this analysis was to compare Antoine parameter data from 3 independent data sources; Hansen, Yaws, and Custom data and identify the source that generates the most accurate vapor pressure values with the least bias, relative to the referent data set from the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Temperatures predicted from 3 different Antoine sources across a range of vapor pressures for 59 chemicals are compared to the reference source. The results show that temperatures predicted using Antoine parameters from the 3 sources are not statistically significantly different, indicating that all 3 sources could be useful. However, the Yaws dataset will be used in the SDM 2.0 because the data is readily available and robust.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it