MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016531446 · doi:10.1021/ie0100333

Thermal Desorption Treatment of Contaminated Soils in a Novel Batch Thermal Reactor

2001· article· en· W2016531446 on OpenAlexafffund
Marline T. Smith, Franco Berruti, Anil K. Mehrotra

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater flow and contamination studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermal desorptionDesorptionEnvironmental remediationChemistrySoil waterContaminationSoil contaminationSorptionEnvironmental chemistryAdsorptionEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-temperature thermal desorption, in which thermal energy is used to vaporize and physically separate volatile and semivolatile organic contaminants from soil, is among the most promising and economic ex situ soil remediation alternatives. Experiments were performed using a bench-scale thermal desorber, the batch thermal reactor, which was developed as a prototype to commercial desorbers. A treatability study using four representative samples of industrial contaminated soil was followed by a fundamental study of the thermal desorption process using three controlled samples prepared by mixing a soil with binary mixtures of selected polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. For the industrial samples, the effect of desorber residence time, temperature, and several pretreatments on contaminant removal was investigated. Three of the five samples were successfully treated to the legislated soil remediation limits. Using the prepared samples, the effects of sample porosity, contaminant molar mass, desorber residence time, and temperature on thermal desorption were investigated. The experimental results were fitted to an exponential desorption equation, and the desorption rate curves were generated to provide a basis for scale-up.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations53
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicGroundwater flow and contamination studiesFrench-language works237,207