MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155042260 · doi:10.4177/ccgp-d-11-00011.1

Waste Classification of Slag Generated in a Pilot-Scale Entrained-Flow Gasifier

2012· article· en· W2155042260 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashleigh Cousins, Robin W. Hughes, David McCalden, Dennis Y. Lu, Edward J. Anthony

Bibliographic record

VenueCoal Combustion and Gasification Products · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWood gas generatorSlag (welding)Waste managementEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)Flow (mathematics)Process engineeringEngineeringMaterials scienceMetallurgyMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Series of gasification tests have been completed in the pilot-scale entrained-flow slagging gasifier at CanmetENERGY using Canadian coals, oil-sand coke, and blends of these fuels to determine if the produced slags are nonhazardous in nature. Solid wastes generated during these tests were analyzed for their trace metals, crystallinity, and toxic constituent leaching tendency in an attempt to provide more insight into the possibility of disposal or by-product use of gasifier-produced solid waste. The gasification tests were performed at conditions representative of commercial gasifiers using a dry-fuel-feed configuration. The lower-volatility elements were found to partition between the slag and process-water solids (PWS) collected after gasification of the oil-sand coke. The less volatile group 1 elements tended to be enriched in both solid streams, whereas the slightly more volatile group 2 elements tended to exhibit higher enrichment in the PWS. Slag samples were found to be inert with regard to their leaching potential, and so these materials can be considered nonhazardous.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCoal Combustion and Gasification ProductsSame topicCoal and Its By-productsFrench-language works237,207