MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116267274 · doi:10.1080/15567030600819973

Catalytic Processing of Waste Plastics With/Without Petroleum Resid—An Economic Evaluation

2006· article· en· W2116267274 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sources Part A Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKing Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsSyncrude
KeywordsPayback periodProfitability indexWaste managementCapital investmentPetroleumInvestment (military)Economic analysisPlastic wasteEnvironmental scienceAgricultural economicsBusinessEngineeringEconomicsFinanceChemistryProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic evaluation of processing mixed plastic waste (MPW) with/without vacuum residue (VR) into a heavy liquid is presented for Saudi Arabian conditions. Profitability analysis was carried out for different plant capacities, capital investment and product selling price. The facility is economically not viable at a capacity of processing 100,000 TPA MPW without VR. It was concluded that processing of MPW with VR at a capacity of 200,000 TPA (80,000 TPA MPW and 120,000 TPA VR) is economically feasible for Saudi Arabian conditions. The IRR is about 14.6% with a payback period of 6.4 years and break-even capacity of 47.6%.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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