MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092079167 · doi:10.1021/ef900783z

Characterization of Heteroatoms in Residue Fluid Catalytic Cracking (RFCC) Diesel by Gas Chromatography and Mass Spectrometry

2009· article· en· W2092079167 on OpenAlexaff
Quan Shi, Chunming Xu, Suoqi Zhao, Keng H. Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryDiesel fuelGas chromatographyFluid catalytic crackingOrganic chemistryAlkylAcetic anhydrideSulfurChemical ionizationMass spectrometryCatalysisChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrogen-, sulfur-, and oxygen-containing hydrocarbons in a residue fluid catalytic cracking (RFCC)-derived diesel were characterized by a gas chromatograph equipped with a pulsed flame photometric detector and an electron impact, ammonia chemical ionization mass spectrometer. Caustic and acid extractions on RFCC diesel were performed to isolate the phenolic and basic nitrogen compounds, respectively. The fraction of RFCC diesel that contained the basic nitrogen compounds was reacted with acetic anhydride to allow for chromatographic separation of amino-aromatic compounds from the rest of the non-reactive basic nitrogen compounds. The majority of basic nitrogen compounds were anilines, as expected. Non-basic nitrogen compounds in RFCC diesel were alkyl indoles and alkyl carbazoles. Double-ring and poly-aromatic amines were identified in RFCC diesel by the acetylation reaction. The majority of sulfur compounds in RFCC diesel were alkyl benzothiophenes and dibenzothiophenes, after being isolated by Pd 2+ ligand-exchange chromatography. Dihydrobenzohiophenes and dihydronaphthanthiophenes, despite a low concentration, were also identified in the subfractions. The majority of oxygen compounds in RFCC diesel were phenolic compounds. In addition to alkylphenols, bicyclic and polycyclic phenols were identified and characterized in the acidic fraction.

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 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.206
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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