MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017214317 · doi:10.1021/ef060411m

Advanced Coal Characterization:  A Review

2007· review· en· W2017214317 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalCharacterization (materials science)Elemental analysisLiquefactionCoal combustion productsPulverized coal-fired boilerCombustionMineralogyProcess engineeringCoal liquefactionEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceChemistryWaste managementNanotechnologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coal is highly heterogeneous in nature, and for this reason, several analytical techniques are needed for its characterization so as to accurately predict its behavior during conversion processes such as combustion, gasification, or liquefaction. Conventional analyses such as proximate analysis, ash analysis, and ash fusion temperatures assume coal as a homogeneous material and provide only bulk properties. The performance correlations based on these analyses are unable to describe adequately the impact of coal quality on conversion efficiencies and plant performance. A number of advanced bulk analytical techniques, such as FTIR and 13C NMR, provide information on the organic structure of coal. Chemical fractionation technique provides information on the inorganic matter present in coal in a form other than mineral grains. Bulk analysis techniques such as XRD and SIROQUANT provide information on the types of minerals present in coal. Thermomechanical analysis (TMA)an advanced bulk analytical techniqueprovides detailed thermal behavior of ash relevant to power-plant operations. Several advanced characterization techniques have emerged recently which consider pulverized coal as a heterogeneous material made up of individual particles and are able to examine these coal particles in much greater detail. An automated reflectogram (AR) technique provides a variation of reflectivitya measure of heterogeneity in the organic part. A computer-controlled scanning electron microscopy (CCSEM) analysis technique has been developed over the last 25 years to provide much more detailed information on mineral matter in coal and mineral−coal associations in pulverized coal. The paper discusses the details of these techniques and how the analysis from these techniques is used in modeling procedures to provide a better understanding of coal conversion behavior.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.261 · 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