Water Vapor Adsorption–Desorption Hysteresis Due to Clustering of Water on Nonporous Surfaces
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
Water vapor is continuously adsorbed onto and desorbed from all kinds of surfaces depending on changes in relative humidity. Adsorption-desorption hysteresis of water that occurs on various nonporous surfaces and extends down to low relative humidities has been reported for decades, but remains unexplained. Here we show experimentally that such hysteresis is a common phenomenon on metal oxide and mineral surfaces and can be divided into two distinct categories based on the wettability of the adsorbent surface. Type I hysteresis occurs on more hydrophobic surfaces and is associated with adsorption isotherms that behave rather linearly as water saturation is approached, whereas type II hysteresis occurs on more hydrophilic surfaces and is associated with adsorption isotherms that curve steeply upward close to saturation. Our model calculations strongly indicate that adsorption in both types occurs cluster-wise, and the type I hysteresis is caused by contact angle hysteresis, while type II hysteresis is associated with film formation close to saturation. The understanding of water vapor adsorption and desorption mechanisms may be key for explaining and quantifying physical and chemical interfacial phenomena in atmospheric and industrial environments.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.009 |
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