MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Gas Hydrate Dissociation Temperature Prediction in Porous Media: Effects of Pore Size and Modeling Approach

2025· article· en· W4415792781 on OpenAlexafffund
Mostafa Hosseini, Richard Boudreault, Yuri Leonenko

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsClathrate hydratePropaneMethaneDissociation (chemistry)HydratePorosityPorous mediumNatural gas

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the dissociation behavior of gas hydrates in confined porous media is crucial for assessing their stability and potential applications in energy storage, carbon capture, and climate modeling. In this study, we develop two distinct approaches to predict the equilibrium dissociation temperature of gas hydrates in porous materials with varying pore sizes: a thermodynamic model based on the activity approach and a suite of machine learning (ML) models. The thermodynamic model explicitly accounts for the effects of confinement on hydrate phase stability and was validated using an unfiltered data set for methane (CH 4 ) and propane (C 3 H 8 ) hydrates, achieving low average absolute deviations (AAD%) of 0.17 and 0.62%, respectively. To complement and generalize these predictions, we trained four ML models: Decision Tree, Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Multi-Layer Perceptron. These models used input features such as pore diameter, system pressure, and critical gas properties. A group-based data splitting strategy was applied, with propane data exclusively reserved for testing to assess true generalization. The SVM model exhibited the highest predictive performance on unseen data, with an AAD% of 0.52%. To enhance interpretability, SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis was employed. The results confirmed alignment between the ML model’s decision logic and known physical principles and identified critical temperature, pressure, and pore size as the most influential features. While group-based splitting improved robustness, discrete SHAP patterns suggest that a broader variety of gases in the training data could further enhance generalizability. Overall, this integration of physics-based and data-driven modeling provides accurate and interpretable predictions of hydrate dissociation behavior in porous systems, supporting future developments in both geological and industrial 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & Fuels→Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena→French-language works237,207→