Radial distribution modeling of liquid-phase phenol concentration in a liquid–solid fluidized bed photoreactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A fluidized bed photoreactor with titanium dioxide-immobilized spherical activated carbon particles was examined. The light intensity profile was modeled using the Lambert-Beer rule for the modeling of the radial distribution of liquid-phase phenol concentration in the fluidized bed photoreactor, when considering the reactor composed of numerous differential annular drums and no mass transfer between drums. The model could be well matched with the experimental data which indicated the liquid flow rate of 13.8 L/min was the optimum in the balance of flow rate-related light penetration and photocatalyst concentration. By integration of liquid-phase phenol concentration along the radius, photocatalytic oxidation performance of the photoreactor was evaluated in comparison with the experimental data and model prediction. The results showed that the errors were less than 30% for most of the predictions. It is suggested that mass transfer and flow rate difference along the radial direction should be considered to obtain more precise prediction.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".