MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991291215 · doi:10.1021/ef900424a

Recovery of Hydrogen and Sulfur by Indirect Electrolysis of Hydrogen Sulfide

2009· article· en· W1991291215 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Gas Emission Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrolysisChemistryHydrogen sulfideElectrochemistryInorganic chemistryElectrolyteAbsorption (acoustics)HydrogenSulfurSulfur dioxideAqueous solutionMass transferElectrodeMaterials scienceChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) absorption and conversion to hydrogen and sulfur were carried out in an acidic aqueous vanadium dioxide (VO 2 ) + solution coupled with indirect electrolysis. In this paper, the mechanisms of absorption and electrochemical reactions of the process are discussed. Parametric studies were conducted to determine the effects of operating parameters on absorption and electrochemical reactions. The results showed that the H 2 S absorption increased with temperature; greater than 90% of H 2 S absorption occurred at 50 °C. The absorption reaction was mass-transfer-limiting. In the electrolysis reaction, the current efficiency reached 97% at 45 °C after an extended electrolysis time. The optimal reaction conditions were at a proton concentration of 7 mol/kg of H 2 O in the electrolyte, (VO 2 ) + concentration of lower than 0.65 mol/kg of H 2 O in the electrolyte, and (VO 2 ) + concentration of higher than 0.55 mol/kg of H 2 O in the absorbent. Sulfur particles that are produced can be easily recovered. Some aspects related to design optimization of the absorption process and electrochemical reactor are also discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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