CO<sub>2</sub> capture using the clathrate hydrate process employing cellulose foam as a porous media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new biodegradable porous medium has been employed in this work for the hydrate-based gas separation (HBGS) process to capture carbon dioxide in a fixed bed column from a precombustion stream. Propane (2.5 mol%) was added as a promoter to reduce the operating pressure of the HBGS process. Experiments were conducted at 6 MPa and 274.2 K at different water saturation levels (50% and 100%) in a cellulose foam bed. It was found that a normalized rate of hydrate formation was more than double for 50% as compared to 100% water-saturated level. In addition, kinetic modelling of hydrate formation in porous media has been carried out using Avrami model by utilizing the experimental gas uptake data from current and published works. The Avrami model was found to fit the hydrate growth kinetics very well, up to 40 min of hydrate growth for different porous media like silica sand, polyurethane foam, and cellulose foam, and for different guest gas and gas mixtures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".