MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100677218

The Advantages and Prospects of Liquefied Natural Gas (LGN)

2015· article· en· W2100677218 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zhichao Zhang, Mingxing Bai, Jianpeng Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpacecraft and Cryogenic Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiquefied natural gasLiquefactionNatural gasSubmarine pipelineRefrigerationEnvironmental scienceProcess (computing)Capital costShoreWaste managementEngineeringPetroleum engineeringComputer scienceGeologyMechanical engineeringOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the usage of LNG (liquefied natural gas) continues to grow, the natural gas value remains high, large capacities of LNG plants which lead to lower cost per unit of LNG produced avail the LNG projects under construction or in plan. The refrigeration and liquefaction process is the key element of LNG project and it can consume about 35% of the capital expenditure and up to 50% of the subsequent operating cost. Technology advances have lowered the cost for liquefaction and regasifying, shipping and storing LNG. This report presents the main technologies available for natural gas liquefaction based on onshore and base-load cases. An overview of LNG processes including the refrigeration theory and pretreatment process involved is explained as well in details. Parameters between alternative technologies for the operating units are compared for economically choosing process routines. All existing LNG plants are located on-shore, reasons for potential development reasons for offshore plants are also discussed in this report.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.288
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.026
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicSpacecraft and Cryogenic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207