MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of a Continuous Process to Produce Ti via Metallothermic Reduction of TiCl<sub>4</sub> in Molten Salt

2013· article· en· W2003661416 on OpenAlexaff
D.S. van Vuuren, Salomon Johannes Oosthuizen, J. Swanepoel

Bibliographic record

VenueKey engineering materials · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicMolten salt chemistry and electrochemical processes
Canadian institutionsCanadian Society of Intestinal Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMolten saltTitaniumAgglomerateProcess engineeringProcess (computing)ScheduleReduction (mathematics)Materials scienceProcess developmentMetallurgyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After evaluating many different routes to produce titanium, the CSIR of South Africa selected a process to produce titanium powder continuously via metallothermic reduction of TiCl4 in molten salt. The project risks are being managed using the well-known STAGE/GATE method. The first two stages, viz, Route Selection and Preliminary Assessment have been completed and the next stage entailing campaigns extending over several days of uninterrupted operation, producing titanium at a rate of about 2 kg/h has recently begun. The rationale for selecting the process route is briefly reviewed and key process problems that had to be solved before embarking on scale-up and measures to do so are explained. Specific problems are: • Feed line blockages, • Titanium product formation and adherence to reactor internals, • Agglomerate formation; and • Production of very fine particles. Lastly the planned schedule and current status of the project are 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.

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)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKey engineering materialsSame topicMolten salt chemistry and electrochemical processesFrench-language works237,207