Fluid Catalytic Cracking Quality Improvement of Bitumen after Paraffinic Froth Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study dealt with a systematic investigation on the fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) performances of two bitumen samples a partially deasphalted bitumen from a froth treatment process using a paraffinic solvent and a dry bitumen extracted using an aromatic solvent (the regular bitumen). Each bitumen sample was characterized and diluted with a heavy gas oil (an FCC feed) derived from Alberta conventional crude Rainbow Zama to produce two series of blends in 0, 10, 25, 50, 75, and 100 wt % bitumen concentrations. All samples were catalytically cracked in a microactivity test (MAT) reactor loaded with a wide-pore FCC catalyst at 540 °C. Liquid products from selected runs were characterized for hydrocarbon type and distribution of sulfur by boiling point. The improvement in cracking yields and product quality of bitumen after froth treatment with paraffinic solvent was assessed. The economic level of bitumen addition to heavy gas oil in FCC operation was also established.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".