MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068781725 · doi:10.2202/1542-6580.1139

A Review of Short Residence Time Cracking Processes

2005· review· en· W2068781725 on OpenAlexaff
Craig Hulet, Cédric Briens, Franco Berruti, Edward Chan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicScientific Research and Discoveries
Canadian institutionsSyncrude (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrackingRaw materialResidence time (fluid dynamics)Fluid catalytic crackingWaste managementProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review examines the key features and configurations of short residence time cracking processes from a diverse range of industries that have been developed over the past 25 years. These industries include: bitumen or heavy oil upgrading, biomass pyrolysis, olefin production, catalytic cracking, and coal gasification. Characterization of the gas, liquid, and solid products and feedstock is provided wherever possible. In addition, a description of the source and mechanism of heat transfer, and how the feedstock is brought into contact with and separated from – this source is also given.There is a strong economic incentive for considering short residence time cracking processes. Not only do such processes increase the yields of the more valuable liquid and gaseous products, but more compact designs would also decrease capital costs. Careful control of the vapour residence times appears to be crucial in order to prevent secondary cracking and yet allow for maximum cracking of the feedstock. Rapid and thorough mixing of the feedstock with the heat source, not just creating a uniform dispersion, is also a key design aspect to consider. Finally, rapid and complete separation must also be carefully considered; again, to help control product residence time and avoid secondary cracking but also from a heat balance point of view.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Chemical Reactor EngineeringSame topicScientific Research and DiscoveriesFrench-language works237,207