Mathematical Modeling and Experimental Breakthrough Curves of Carbon Dioxide Adsorption on Metal Organic Framework CPM-5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is essential to capture carbon dioxide from flue gas because it is considered one of the main causes of global warming. Several materials and different methods have been reported for CO2 capturing including adsorption onto zeolites and porous membranes, as well as absorption in amine solutions. All such methods require high energy input and high cost. A new class of porous materials called Metal Organic Frameworks (MOFs) exhibited excellent performance in extracting carbon dioxide from a gas mixture. In this study, the breakthrough curves for the adsorption of carbon dioxide on CPM-5 (crystalline porous materials) were obtained experimentally and theoretically using a laboratory-scale fixed-bed column at different experimental conditions such as feed flow rate, adsorption temperature, and feed concentration. It was found that the CPM-5 has a dynamic CO2 adsorption capacity of 11.9 wt % (2.7 mmol/g) (corresponding to 8 mL/min, 298 K, and 25% v/v CO2). The tested CPM-5 showed an outstanding adsorption equilibrium capacity (e.g., 2.3 mmol/g (10.2 wt %) at 298 K) compared to other adsorbents, which can be considered as an attractive adsorbent for separation of CO2 from flue gas.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".