Morphological and Mineralogical Characterization of Oil Sands Fly Ash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The feasibility of extracting metal values from the oil sands fly ash has been studied in some detail; however, little work has been completed on the mineral phases in the fly ash and their phase changes during ash formation from oil sands coke. Characterization of the ash is essential to obtain sufficient information about the mineral assemblage and its processability. In this study, coke obtained from Syncrude and Suncor, which are the two major oil producers in northern Alberta, Canada, was investigated to elucidate the morphology, ash formation behavior, and the mineralogy, by ashing it at various temperatures. Both high temperature ashing and low temperature ashing (LTA) were employed, and the ash structure was investigated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD). The results clearly showed that a slight difference in chemistry and mineralogy between two samples greatly affected the properties of ash at high temperatures. Formation of oil sands fly ash was explained by the movement of iron−titanium-related minerals and amorphous aluminosilicate melts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".