MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001358818 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20430

The direct oxidation of hydrogen sulphide over activated carbons prepared from lignite coal and biochar

2011· article· en· W2001358818 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Ramin Azargohar, Ajay K. Dalai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Gas Emission Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsBiocharChemistryCoalActivated carbonInert gasDesorptionThermal treatmentMethaneVolume (thermodynamics)HydrogenAdsorptionPyrolysisInorganic chemistryNuclear chemistryWaste managementOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Physically (steam) and chemically (KOH) activated carbons prepared from Luscar coal and biochar were used for removal of low concentrations of hydrogen sulphide (1 mol%) in methane. A modification method including acid treatment and thermal desorption in an inert atmosphere was used and the effects of this modification on the porous structure, surface chemistry, and ash content were studied. It increased total pore volume of activated carbons prepared from coal and biochar by 43% and 11%, respectively. Acid treatment changed the surface chemistry of activated carbons. Also, thermal desorption removed most of the acidic groups, especially carboxylic groups. The break‐through times corresponding to 80% removal of H2S using modified activated carbons prepared from coal and biochar were increased to 102 and 131 min, respectively. Also, the production of SO2 as an undesirable by‐product was less than 1.9% of H2S fed into the reactor.

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 score0.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicIndustrial Gas Emission ControlFrench-language works237,207