Upgrading of Athabasca Bitumen Using Supported Catalyst in Conjunction With In-Situ Combustion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Dry and normal wet combustion-tube tests were examined to study the upgrading potential of Athabasca bitumen supplied by Japan Canada Oil Sand Limited, using supported catalyst in conjunction with in-situ combustion. These tests were part of a larger program of combustion-tube tests performed by the In Situ Combustion Research Group under the auspices of the Alberta Innovates Centre for In Situ Energy (AICISE). The tests were premixed and carried out at the same pressure, 1,500 psig, preheat temperature, 95C, and ignition temperature, 350C. The catalysts bed for the dry combustion was heated externally to 325C while that of the normal wet combustion was not heated externally. Water was coinjected to achieve a stabilized water/air ratio of 1.8 kg water/m3 (ST) air injected for the normal wet combustion. Significant hydrodenitrogenation coupled with decreased viscosity and increased gravity in API was observed for both tests, indicating upgrading of the original Athabasca bitumen.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".