Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33267512›Full record

ArticleEntropy (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Distinguishing between Clausius, Boltzmann and Pauling Entropies of Frozen Non-Equilibrium States.

Rainer Feistel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Self-Organisation of Prediction Models.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Rainer FeistelLeibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research IOW, 18119 Rostock, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In conventional textbook thermodynamics, entropy is a quantity that may be calculated by different methods, for example experimentally from heat capacities (following Clausius) or statistically from numbers of microscopic quantum states (following Boltzmann and Planck). It had turned out that these methods do not necessarily provide mutually consistent results, and for equilibrium systems their difference was explained by introducing a residual zero-point entropy (following Pauling), apparently violating the Nernst theorem. At finite temperatures, associated statistical entropies which count microstates that do not contribute to a body's heat capacity, differ systematically from Clausius entropy, and are of particular relevance as measures for metastable, frozen-in non-equilibrium structures and for symbolic information processing (following Shannon). In this paper, it is suggested to consider Clausius, Boltzmann, Pauling and Shannon entropies as distinct, though related, physical quantities with different key properties, in order to avoid confusion by loosely speaking about just "entropy" while actually referring to different kinds of it. For instance, zero-point entropy exclusively belongs to Boltzmann rather than Clausius entropy, while the Nernst theorem holds rigorously for Clausius rather than Boltzmann entropy. The discussion of those terms is underpinned by a brief historical review of the emergence of corresponding fundamental thermodynamic concepts.

Indexed as

empirical entropyfrozen statesmetastable statesNernst theoremnon-equilibriumPauling entropyresidual entropyShannon entropystatistical entropysymbolic information

Identifiers

PMID33267512
PMCPMC7515328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.