MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028521050 · doi:10.1021/ie010121n

A Comparison of Two- and Single-Phase Models for Fluidized-Bed Reactors

2001· article· en· W2028521050 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

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Mixing
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsButaneFluidized bedCatalysisMass transferPlug flowBubble column reactorMaleic anhydrideChemistryPhase (matter)Plug flow reactor modelBubbleChemical engineeringCountercurrent exchangeTrickle-bed reactorYield (engineering)ThermodynamicsMaterials scienceContinuous stirred-tank reactorChromatographyOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryMechanicsMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Simulations of a bubbling/turbulent fluidized-bed reactor have been studied using the catalytic oxidation of n -butane to maleic anhydride (MAN) in the presence of a vanadium phosphorus oxide catalyst. The performance of the reactor was investigated using three different models: (a) a simple two-phase flow model, (b) a dynamic two-phase structure model, and (c) a plug-flow model. The simple two-phase model was found to underpredict the performance of the fluidized-bed reactors because of the oversimplified assumptions involved in this model. By analyzing the mass transfer in the two-phase models, it was shown that the conversion of reactants occurs mainly in the emulsion phase at low gas velocities and in the bubble phase at high gas velocities. The performance of the reactor, in terms of n -butane conversion, yield of MAN, and selectivity of produced MAN, was analyzed at different superficial gas velocities, initial n -butane concentrations, and deactivation rates of the catalyst.

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)0.001
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 score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.201 · 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