MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030842891 · doi:10.1021/ef2001772

Application of Nanotechnology for Heavy Oil Upgrading: Catalytic Steam Gasification/Cracking of Asphaltenes

2011· article· en· W2030842891 on OpenAlexaff
Nashaat N. Nassar, Azfar Hassan, Pedro Pereira‐Almao

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsphalteneAdsorptionCatalysisCrackingChemical engineeringFluid catalytic crackingNanoparticleNon-blocking I/OMaterials scienceThermogravimetric analysisOxideChemistryOrganic chemistryNanotechnologyMetallurgyComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanotechnology is a rapidly growing technology with considerable potential applications and benefits. Among the numerous applications of nanotechnology for energy and the environment, adsorption, oxidation, and gasification/cracking of asphaltenes, a problematic constituent present in heavy oil, on nanoparticle surfaces are one of the most recent examples. In this work, three different types of metal oxide nanoparticles, namely, Fe 2 O 3, Co 3 O 4, and NiO, were selected for asphaltene adsorption and catalytic steam gasification/cracking. Adsorption and gasification of asphaltenes were studied using thermogravimetric analysis. The nanoparticles were found to be very efficient for asphaltene adsorption and catalytic steam gasification/cracking. Asphaltene adsorption affinity on the surface of nanoparticles followed the following order: NiO > Co 3 O 4 > Fe 2 O 3 . The catalytic steam gasification/cracking of asphaltenes in the presence of nanoparticles followed the same order as well. The calculated percent conversion at the onset temperature for NiO, Co 3 O 4, and Fe 3 O 4 nanoparticles was 37, 32, and 21%, respectively. A relationship between adsorption affinity and catalytic activity is also found to exist.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations206
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207