## 4 Discussion
### Isokinetic Temperature  
As demonstrated by [PERSON] in his book [42], the problem of determining kinetic parameters can lead to incorrect or unjustified quantities. Generally, justified considerations on the correctness of the determined parameters of the Arrhenius equation may undoubtedly include another element connected with it-the isokinetic temperature \(T_{iso}\) or compensation temperature \(T_{c}\), to which many works have been devoted, among others [4; 41; 42; 43; 44; 45; 46; 47]. The temperature \(T_{iso}\) is determined by both Equation (1) and the classical _KCE_ equation in the form, where intercept is expressed by the Arrhenius law, which formally makes it a tautology:  
\[\ln A=\frac{E}{RT_{iso}}+\ln(k_{iso}) \tag{44}\]  
where:  
\[k_{iso}=A\cdot e^{-\frac{E}{RT_{iso}}}=\text{const} \tag{45}\]  
When, in Equation (45), for each coordinate pair \([E;\ln A]\), the determined \(T_{iso}=\text{const}\) leads to \(k_{iso}=\text{const}\), then this is the \"true\" isokinetic temperature. The _KCE_ in terms of (44) with (45) exhibits features of self-consistent equations. As will be shown further on, the fluctuation of the constant is relatively high despite \(r^{2}>0.99\). Thus, it can be considered that this leads to a _KCE_ called horizontal (isoconversional). According to the analyses presented in [43; 44; 45; 46], the isoconversional _KCE_, characteristic of isoconversional methods, can be described as the statistical compensation effect [45] characterized by high isokinetic temperatures. The fundamental problem, however, is whether the general notation of _KCE_ (Equation (1)), and specifically in the form of Equation (34) and in Figures 13-14, makes physicochemical sense for a significant statistical level, as defined by high value of determination coefficient. For this purpose, two criteria: _CQF_ (Compensation Quality Factor) and \(K\) according to [48; 49] were used. The analytical distinction in the _KCE_ (and _EEC_) relations in both physicochemical and statistical sense for high determination coefficients \(\left(r^{2}\right)\) for a specific number of \(N\) measurements was proposed. The \(K\) parameter can be called the position parameter. For _KCE_ assessment it is proposed:  
\[CQF=1-\sqrt{\frac{1-r^{2}}{\frac{1}{r^{2}}\left(\frac{T_{iso}}{r^{2}}\right)^{ 2}-2\left(\frac{T_{iso}}{r}\right)+1}},\;0\leq CQF\leq 1 \tag{46}\]  
\[K=2\frac{\frac{1}{T_{iso}}-\frac{1}{T_{iso}}}{\frac{1}{T_{iso}}-\frac{1}{T_{ high}}},\;\;T_{min}=\frac{T_{iso}}{r^{2}} \tag{47}\]For a probability of 99% [48]:  
\[CQF_{99}=0.29+\frac{1.41}{N^{0.57}} \tag{48}\]  
The meaning of the symbols and more methodological and interpretive details are included in Appendix A. Starting from the evaluation of the veracity of the determined isokinetic temperature in Equation (34), an important issue is the determination of the temperature designated as \(T_{low}\). On the one hand, according to the data presented in Table 1, this is the average initial temperature (\(T_{low}=586.3\) K), but simulation analyses were carried out starting from a temperature of 298 K. The average temperature for \(\alpha=1\) was taken as the \(T_{high}\) temperature, i.e., \(T_{high}=643.2\) K.  
For the first case using Equation (46) we get: \(CQF=0.37\) for \(N=8\) and according to Equation (48) \(CQF_{99}=0.721\) and Equation (47) \(K=1.22\), that is, the isokinetic temperature does not meet the criterion Equation (48). On the other hand, for the second version of \(T_{low}=298\) K we similarly obtain: \(CQF=925\) K; \(K=1.019\) and accept the physicochemical sense of the isokinetic temperature. In this paper, the position parameter according to Equation (47) can be transformed to the form:  
\[K=\left(1-\frac{T_{lim}}{T_{iso}}r^{2}\right)\cdot\frac{T_{high}+T_{low}}{T_{ high}-T_{low}} \tag{49}\]  
which makes it possible to carry out a position analysis according to the characters in the expression shown in brackets, i.e., \(\left(1-\frac{T_{lim}}{T_{iso}}r^{2}\right)\leq or\geq 0\), and \(K\leq 0\) or \(K\geq 0\).