Confidence interval on the activation energy obtained from differential isoconversional methods
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
Abstract In complex condensed phase reactions, the effective activation energy depends on both conversion degree and temperature. In our previous research, we introduced a modification to the Friedman method allowing for the calculation of activation energy as a function of conversion and temperature. In this study, we introduced an approach based on the least squares method to assess the confidence interval for activation energy obtained from the traditional and modified Friedman methods. The variance of the activation energy in the modified Friedman approach is estimated using the delta method. Additionally, we have presented a criterion for comparing and assessing the accuracy of results obtained through both conventional and modified isoconversional techniques. The proposed method was applied to the kinetic data of a simulated reaction and the thermal degradation of polyethylene to evaluate their activation energies and corresponding confidence intervals. GNU Octave/MATLAB codes were provided for evaluating activation energy and its confidence interval using both isoconversional methods.
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) | 0.002 | 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