Single and Mixed Oxide-Supported Nickel Catalysts for the Catalytic Partial Oxidation Reforming of Gasoline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The catalytic partial oxidation of iso - octane and sulfur-free gasoline was studied over Ni-based catalysts supported on CeO 2 −, La 2 O 3 −, ZrO 2 −, Al 2 O 3 −, and their combinations prepared by precipitation and surfactant assisted methods. A comparison of their performance was also made with a Ni/Al 2 O 3 catalyst for the oxidation of pure gasoline surrogate, that is, iso - octane. These catalysts were characterized by specific surface area, temperature programmed reduction (TPR), H 2 chemisorption, and X-ray diffraction, and their catalytic performance was tested in a fixed bed tubular reactor. The characteristics of the catalysts were then correlated with their performance. The use of CeO 2 as a support prepared by a surfactant approach was found to produce the most stable catalyst for the partial oxidation of both iso-octane and gasoline. TPR results showed that the stability of CeO 2 is derived from its enhanced reducibility at lower temperatures as compared to either similar support prepared by other methods or different support prepared by the same method or other methods. Brunauer−Emmett−Teller surface area measurements indicated a 100% enhancement in the CeO 2 support specific surface area when the surfactant method was used during preparation as compared with the precipitation method. On the basis of a stability test, 5% Ni CeO 2 was found to be the most stable catalyst.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".