MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019549175 · doi:10.1177/0270467606290306

A Technical and Economic Review of Solar Hydrogen Production Technologies

2006· article· en· W2019549175 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

VenueBulletin of Science Technology & Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFossil fuelRenewable energyHydrogen productionHydrogen economyHydrogenProduction (economics)Environmental scienceHydrogen technologiesNatural resource economicsRenewable fuelsWork (physics)Waste managementBiochemical engineeringChemistryEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrogen energy systems are being developed to replace fossil fuels–based systems for transportation and stationary application. One of the challenges facing the widespread adoption of hydrogen as an energy vector is the lack of an efficient, economical, and sustainable method of hydrogen production. In the short term, hydrogen produced from fossil fuels will facilitate a transition to the hydrogen economy. In the long term, renewable hydrogen production methods will have to be adopted as resources become scarce, causing the price of fossil fuels to rise. In this work, a number of methods have been considered for the renewable production of solar hydrogen, and thermochemical sulphur-iodine cycles proved to be the most promising. The sulphur-iodine cycles have the highest efficiencies and use widely available reactants with relatively straightforward reaction mechanisms, which make them the most economical and technically feasible option for renewable hydrogen production.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.004
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · 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