MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011990194 · doi:10.1021/es9909428

Evaluation of Radiation Absorption in Slurry Photocatalytic Reactors. 1. Assessment of Methods in Use and New Proposal

2000· article· en· W2011990194 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rodolfo J. Brandi, Orlando M. Alfano, A. E. Cassano

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Gender and HealthUniversidad Nacional del LitoralAlexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
KeywordsPhotocatalysisOxidizing agentAbsorption (acoustics)SlurryChemistryPhotonProcess engineeringMaterials scienceCatalysisPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photocatalytic reactions are the result of a light-activated process by which an appropriate semiconductor can generate electrons and holes that, afterward, can participate in oxidative−reductive reactions. One of the most important applications of these processes consists of the use of these catalytic systems for oxidizing pollutants contained in water and air systems. In these photocatalytic reactions, the initiation step is always a function of the local volumetric rate of photon absorption (LVRPA). Many of these reactions are carried out in water environments where the catalyst is a suspension of small size, solid particles. Then the system is heterogeneous, and evaluation of the light distribution becomes difficult due to the concomitant presence of radiation absorption and scattering. In this paper, we present a general theoretical frame for analyzing the different methods that have been proposed to evaluate the LVRPA. Using this approach, one can have a precise knowledge and evaluation of the assumptions that are used in each method and can critically discuss their validity. Special emphasis is put in the description of rigorous procedures that account for a complete solution of the radiative transfer equation. It is shown that in order to properly compute reaction quantum yields (or quantum efficiencies for polychromatic light) scattering should always be taken into account; otherwise, large errors can be introduced. The same conclusions are valid for scaling-up slurry-type photocatalytic reactors.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations62
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207