MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correlation of BOS process variables with dust mass formation and zinc content

2013· article· en· W2028212426 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

VenueIronmaking & Steelmaking Processes Products and Applications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCorrosion Behavior and Inhibition
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZincSteelmakingBasic oxygen steelmakingSlurryMetallurgyFerrousChemistryLinear regressionEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryMathematicsEnvironmental engineeringMaterials scienceStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basic oxygen steelmaking (BOS) process typically produces a dust rich in valuable iron units and often contaminated with zinc. This paper takes a look at statistical correlation and multiple regressions of process variables with the quantity of dust and the zinc mass contained in the dust. A robust inline sampling system was designed and installed to isokinetically sample the primary BOS dust slurry from a 248 m3 capacity BOS converter at Tata Steelworks Port Talbot (UK). This system was used to measure the dust mass and composition changes against time for 12 large scale trial heats and to compare with the process information data for a statistical evaluation of the variables. Statistically significant Pearson linear correlations were measured for the total dust mass produced with the iron ore and for the zinc mass contained in the dust with the addition of waste oxide briquettes (WOBs). A multiple regression analysis model showed strong associated correlations between the zinc mass contained in the dust with the galvanised scrap and WOB additions and explained 73% of the zinc mass variance.

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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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