MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091892319 · doi:10.4155/cmt.12.73

Part 7: A review of CO<sub>2</sub>capture using hollow fiber membrane contactors

2013· review· en· W2091892319 on OpenAlexaff
Cui Zheng, David deMontigny

Bibliographic record

VenueCarbon Management · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContactorHollow fiber membraneAbsorption (acoustics)MembraneMaterials scienceProcess engineeringMass transferFiberWettingWork (physics)Computer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringChemistryChromatographyComposite materialThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is Part 7 of the post-combustion carbon capture technology Review Series. It reviews recent progress and developments in hollow fibre membrane contactor research for CO2 capture. Hollow fiber membrane contactors have been studied for CO2 capture from a gas stream since 1985. In recent years, this technology has been considered a promising alternative to conventional absorption technologies, since it offers higher absorption efficiency and avoids common operating problems found in traditional packed columns. In this review, research development focused on CO2 capture using hollow fiber membrane contactors – including membrane module design, mass transfer principles, membrane wetting, simulation and modeling, and solvent regeneration – is presented. Additionally, current significant pilot-scale applications of this technology are discussed and recommendations for future work are presented.

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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.263
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations89
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarbon ManagementSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207