MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007686719 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20373

Equilibrium calculations for direct synthesis of dimethyl ether from syngas

2010· article· en· W2007686719 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gholamreza Moradi, Javad Ahmadpour, Fereydoon Yaripour, J. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDimethyl etherSyngasMethanolCatalysisChemistryDehydrationPartial pressureEquilibrium constantThermodynamicsChemical equilibriumBar (unit)Physical chemistryChemical engineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thermodynamic analysis of single‐step synthesis of dimethyl ether (DME) from syngas over a bi‐functional catalyst (BFC) in a slurry bed reactor has been investigated as a function of temperature (200–240°C), pressure (20–50 bar), and composition feed ratio (H2/CO: 1–2). The BFC was prepared by physical mixing of CuO/ZnO/Al2O3 as a methanol synthesis catalyst and H‐ZSM‐5 as a methanol dehydration catalyst. The three reactions including methanol synthesis from CO and H2, methanol dehydration to DME and water–gas shift reaction were chosen as the independent reactions. The equilibrium thermodynamic analysis includes a theoretical model predicting the behaviour and a comparison to experimental results. Theoretical model calculations of thermodynamic equilibrium constants of the reactions and equilibrium composition of all components at different reaction temperature, pressure, and H2/CO ratio in feed are in good accordance with experimental values.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations35
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207