MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106713449 · doi:10.1002/ghg3.2

Ca looping technology: current status, developments and future directions

2011· article· en· W2106713449 on OpenAlexaff
Edward J. Anthony

Bibliographic record

VenueGreenhouse Gases Science and Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicChemical Looping and Thermochemical Processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scrubbingCurrent (fluid)Flue gasEnvironmental scienceProcess engineeringScale (ratio)Waste managementEngineeringBiochemical engineeringEnvironmental economicsEconomicsElectrical engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Calcium looping technology is a promising new technique for high‐temperature scrubbing of CO2 from flue gas and syngases. Current economic projections suggest it might be able to capture CO2 at costs of ∼$20/ton of avoided CO2. Nonetheless there are questions about the long‐term behavior of natural sorbents in such systems, and there is substantial R&D being done on this technology worldwide to answer questions about whether the performance of natural sorbents can be improved, or whether it would be better to use synthetic ones. The current period is particularly interesting as the first pilot plants and demonstration units capable of operating continuously are now coming on stream, and if successful these will lead to large‐scale industrial demonstrations of the technology in the next 10 to 15 years. © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations102
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreenhouse Gases Science and TechnologySame topicChemical Looping and Thermochemical ProcessesFrench-language works237,207