MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412644029 · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2025.136297

Effects of asphaltenes and molecular composition on the adsorption mechanisms of surfactant mixtures onto basal sandstone of the carbonera formation

2025· article· en· W4412644029 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Victoria Eugenia Mousalli Diaz, Ana María Lozada, Ronald Mercado

Bibliographic record

VenueFuel · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad Industrial de SantanderFrontera EnergyMinisterio de Ciencia y TecnologíaAgencia Nacional de HidrocarburosMinisterio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación
KeywordsAsphaltenePulmonary surfactantAdsorptionChemical engineeringComposition (language)ChemistryBasal (medicine)RheologyChromatographyOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceBiochemistryComposite materialBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adsorption of surfactants from aqueous solutions in porous media is a determining parameter in enhanced oil recovery processes. Surfactant loss due to adsorption on the reservoir rocks is associated to an efficiency decrease during traditional chemical flooding, as it diminishes the reduction of oil–water interfacial tension. However, in the case of oilfields stimulations by cyclic injections of surfactant formulations, adsorption can lead to surface wettability changes. Natural crude-oil polar molecules, such as asphaltenes adsorbed on the mineral are associated to oil-wet surfaces. In such cases, surfactants molecules can compete with asphaltenes for adsorption onto the porous medium or being adsorbed onto these molecules by hydrophobic interactions. Traditional studies focus on the static adsorption isotherms of solid/surfactants systems. This study investigates the adsorption behavior of anionic/nonionic surfactant mixtures including asphaltenes molecules, focusing on the influence of molecular composition and critical micelle concentration. Three surfactant formulations were evaluated: two highly hydrophilic formulations, each composed of two molecules with significantly different water affinities, and one formulation with reduced hydrophilicity. Adsorption mechanisms were analyzed across concentration ranges, with particular attention to monomeric and micellar regions. Results revealed that adsorption behavior is governed by the surfactants’ hydrophilicity and interactions with the substrate or asphaltenes. In the hydrophilic Formulation 1, asphaltenes had minimal impact on total adsorption, but selective adsorption of anionic surfactants on asphaltenes was observed. In contrast, the less hydrophilic Formulation 2 exhibited reduced adsorption in the presence of asphaltenes, with enhanced interfacial excess below the critical micelle concentration attributed to electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. Finally, the hydrophilic Formulation 3 showed significantly increased adsorption in the presence of asphaltenes due to the reduced water affinity of its components. These findings suggest that formulations with balanced hydrophilicity and molecular interactions can enhance adsorption stability and maintain interfacial tension, providing valuable insights for optimizing surfactant performance in enhanced oil recovery applications.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuelSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207