MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042977146 · doi:10.1115/fbc2003-172

Petroleum Coke FBC Ash: A Detailed Look at Calcium in the Ash

2003· article· en· W2042977146 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward J. Anthony, Li Jia, S. Burwell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPetroleum cokeFly ashLimeCoalCokeCoal combustion productsCombustionCalciumCalcium oxideBottom ashSulfurChemistryWaste managementMineralogyMetallurgyEnvironmental sciencePulp and paper industryMaterials scienceEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petroleum coke combustion is different from coal and its behaviour in an FBC environment clearly illustrates this. Analysis of bed ash from the CFBC boilers owned and operated by the Nelson Industrial Steam Company Ltd. (NISCO) was examined in detail to determine the fate of calcium in the ash using a range of techniques. These analyses have shown a free lime content, which is significantly lower than expected based on the elemental analysis of the bed material. Using different methods of analyses than have been typically used for FBC ashes (coal in particular) it would appear that between 6 to 7% of the total CaO in the samples is combined in the form of acid soluble and insoluble other calcium compounds (OCC). This translates to about 30% less free lime (depending on the ash sulfur content) in the sample than would be calculated based on a standard chemical analysis of the bed ash. This current work has identified about 1% of the missing CaO in the form of acid insoluble Ca and Mg vanadates with perhaps as much as 2% of the remaining missing CaO present as soluble OCC.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.186 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoal and Its By-productsFrench-language works237,207