A comparison of three methods to regenerate activated carbon saturated by diesel fuels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The three regeneration methods (thermal treatment, ultrasonication, and solvent extraction) were studied to regenerate the adsorptive capacity of the activated carbons (ACs) that were saturated by the nitrogen and sulphur containing compounds of diesel fuels. This is one of the few reports that give attention to the regeneration of heteroaromatic compounds contaminated ACs. Both model diesel and light cycled oil (LCO) were served as feedstocks. High regeneration rates can be obtained for all three approaches when model diesel was used as the feed. As model diesel was replaced by LCO, a significant drop in capacity restoration can be observed for the first few cycles and then the decrease rate slowed down. Solvent extraction outperformed the other two methods. The causes to lower regeneration performance were also analysed. It is shown that the regenerated carbons had a lower porosity and surface area and fewer surface oxygen functional groups than fresh carbon regardless of the regeneration methods employed. Significant micropore blockage was observed in the carbon regenerated by the thermal approach due to the coke deposit under thermal conditions. Mesopores formed during the regeneration by ultrasonication are considered to promote the carbon adsorption capacity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".