MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971415748 · doi:10.1007/s13203-013-0026-x

TPO/TPD study on the activation of silica supported cobalt catalyst

2013· article· en· W1971415748 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid A. Al‐Megren, Haoyi Chen, Yu Huang, M.C. Al-Kinany, Peter P. Edwards, Tiancun Xiao, Yibo Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Petrochemical Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCobaltCatalysisSelectivitySinteringHydrogenInorganic chemistryChemistryFischer–Tropsch processChemical engineeringMaterials scienceCobalt oxideDispersion (optics)MetallurgyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silica supported cobalt catalysts have been prepared using urea containing cobalt nitrate solution impregnation method, which can give high loading Co 3 O 4 with relatively smaller crystallite size. Compared to the conventional impregnation method, the catalyst prepared with urea added to the cobalt nitrate solution provides higher activity for CO conversion and C 5 + selectivity. To optimize the catalyst activation and simulate the industrial activation, TPO–TPR cycle treatment with or without steam has been applied to the prepared catalysts under various conditions. It is shown that reduction of pure hydrogen with high flow rate leads to a sharp temperature rise in the catalyst bed, which results in the sintering of the cobalt particles. A slow temperature rise with dilute hydrogen helps stabilize the cobalt particles, and the cycle treatment of the catalyst using TPO–TPR without steam induction has little effect on the size of cobalt particles. When steam is included in the reduction stream with hydrogen the TPR–TPO cycle treatment can help increase the Co dispersion, which increases the catalyst activity and selectivity to C 5 + .

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Petrochemical ResearchSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207