MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964216785 · doi:10.1002/cjce.5450790517

Application of high‐pressure swing adsorption process for improvement of CO<sub>2</sub> recovery system from flue gas

2001· article· en· W1964216785 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yukihiro Takamura, Junya Aoki, Shigeo Uchida, Saburou Narita

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlue gasSeparator (oil production)Pressure swing adsorptionDesorptionAdsorptionChemistryAtmospheric pressurePurgePilot plantEnvironmental scienceWaste managementMaterials scienceThermodynamicsEngineeringOrganic chemistryPhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although the super cold separator applied to the system for CO2 recovery from flue gas can produce pure CO2 liquid, the CO2 recovery efficiency is low. Therefore, the addition of a PSA plant was considered for the secondary CO2 recovery from the noncon‐densing gas to improve the efficiency. The PSA plant was operated for adsorption at the same pressure as that of the super cold separator and for desorption at the atmospheric pressure. From both the simulation and the experimental data, it was confirmed that CO2 could be concentrated from 50% in the noncondensing gas to 70% in the recovery gas by the PSA plant and the CO2 recovery efficiency of the plant was about 90%.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations42
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207