MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2239054425 · doi:10.1260/0958-305x.26.6-7.997

Coal Preparation Technology: Status and Development in China

2015· article· en· W2239054425 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Environment · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoal and Its By-products
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalRaw materialCoal preparation plantClean coal technologyClean coalWaste managementEnvironmental scienceNatural resourceChinaProduction (economics)EngineeringChemistryGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth of coal production is supporting China's economic development. This paper discusses significant developments of coal preparation industry in China. The development direction of low-quality coal resources is also described, including the comprehensive utilization of resources and green coal preparation. Coal preparation may shift from the simple separation and production of highquality products to a comprehensive utilization of associated resources and lowquality coal. Green coal preparation is a new concept and involves a highly efficient coal preparation method based on the water cycle and comprehensive utilization of resources. This paper also describes a technology that transforms coal (mineral) resources (including natural, secondary, and artificial resources) into useful products (including raw materials and fuel) by separation, extraction, and processing for an eco-friendly approach to using secondary resources.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.169 · 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