Effect of anti‐Agglomerants on carbon dioxide hydrate formation in oil–water systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The experiments in high‐pressure pipelines simulate the formation and fluid of hydrate under deep‐sea conditions, which has practical significance for the deep‐sea landfill of carbon dioxide (CO2) and the safe running of oil and gas pipelines. In this paper, pure water, white oil, CO2, and arquad 2C‐75 were used to study the formation and flow characteristics of CO2 hydrate in the oil–water system with the help of a loop device, and the growth morphology of hydrate was observed through the view‐window on the loop. The experimental results show that in the low water cut system without anti‐agglomerates, hydrate mainly forms on the surface of water droplets and the surface of the free water layer at the bottom of the loop. In the high water cut system, hydrate forms on the pipe wall in the form of hydrate film. Increasing water cuts can shorten the induction period of hydrate formation. Anti‐agglomerates in the oil–water system can inhibit the growth of hydrate film on the pipe wall effectively. Anti‐agglomerates can shorten the induction time of hydrate formation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".