MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W99292782 · doi:10.5006/c2004-04636

Analysis and Corrosivity Testing of Eight Crude Oils

2004· article· en· W99292782 on OpenAlexaff
Saadedine Tebbal, H. U. Schutt, Richard Podlecki, Chakka Sudhakar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsHusky Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionCrude oilMetallurgyMaterials sciencePetroleum engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the results of several analyses and corrosivity testing performed on eight crude oils (West Texas Sour, Kansas, Midway Sunset from California, Ratawi from Kuwait and Brent, Captain, Heimdal and Mariner from the North Sea). Electrospray-Mass Spectrometry analyses are shown to increase the reliability in the analysis for naphthenic acid content as compared to ASTM D664 and Extraction Method. They are also useful in predicting where the acids are concentrating in the distillation unit. Hydrogen sulfide evolution results are compared to the commonly used total sulfur by ASTM D4294 and are shown to provide another predictive tool with temperature versus H2S evolved. The results of the corrosivity tests of the eight crude oils towards carbon steel, 5Cr, 9Cr and 316SS in a rotating cage set-up at 600F are also included. The combined results of this program were analyzed to determine which technique or combination thereof might better predict the high temperature corrosivity of crude oils and what research is still needed to reach that goal.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207