MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017630232 · doi:10.1260/0263617001493486

Regeneration of Adsorbents by the Use of Liquid, Subcritical and Supercritical Carbon Dioxide

2000· article· en· W2017630232 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdsorption Science & Technology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsDesorptionAdsorptionChemistrySupercritical carbon dioxideSupercritical fluidSolventSolubilityExtraction (chemistry)Carbon dioxideSupercritical fluid extractionChemical engineeringImpurityParticle (ecology)Activated carbonChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature concerning the adsorption and desorption of environmental impurities from adsorbents by means of liquid, subcritical and supercritical carbon dioxide and the author's work on the subject have been reviewed. The influence of the adsorption and desorption temperature, the pressure and the density of the extraction solvent, the solubility of the adsorbate in the extraction solvent, the activation energy for adsorbate desorption and the particle size of the adsorbent on the adsorbate desorption efficiency by this method were discussed.

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 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 score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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