MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149324348 · doi:10.1002/cjce.21937

Mathematical model of the CO<sub>2</sub> solubilisation reaction rates developed for the study of photobioreactors

2013· article· en· W2149324348 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maura Harumi Sugai-Guérios, André Bellin Mariano, JOSÉ VIRIATO COELHO VARGAS, Luiz Fernando de Lima Luz, David A. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsPhotobioreactorMass transferAbsorption (acoustics)Mass transfer coefficientBubbleWork (physics)ChemistryThermodynamicsReaction rateChromatographyMaterials scienceMechanicsWaste managementOrganic chemistryPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transfer of CO2 between the gas and liquid phases is one of the most important processes that occur during cultivation of microalgae in photobioreactors. A key factor that influences the rate of mass transfer is the concentration of CO2 in the liquid phase, which, in turn, depends on the rates of the reactions involved in CO2 solubilisation. This work presents a mathematical model for the rate of these solubilisation reactions with correlations that allow the calculation of the model parameters at temperatures from 5°C to 40°C. The model was validated using data of CO2 mass transfer from the literature obtained with two experimental systems: a bubble column for CO2 absorption and a flat‐panel photobioreactor. The model was further used to show that the increase in the rate of CO2 absorption that occurs at higher pH values is due to increased consumption of CO2(aq) in the solubilisation reactions and not to an increase in kLa. The pH decreases as CO2 is solubilised, therefore, when pH is controlled, the mass transfer rate is higher than it would be without pH control. Our model can be used as a tool to guide the operation, control and scale‐up of photobioreactors for the cultivation of microalgae.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicAlgal biology and biofuel productionFrench-language works237,207