Limestone Acidification Using Citric Acid Coupled with Two-Step Calcination for Improving the CO<sub>2</sub> Sorbent Activity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work investigates the acidification of a natural limestone source using citric acid in order to produce porous calcium oxide (CaO) CO 2 sorbent, with good stability in high-temperature operation. The CO 2 sorption behavior of the proposed material was studied in several adsorption–regeneration cycles under different adsorption conditions (600, 650, and 700 °C), indicating the superior thermal stability and CO 2 adsorption capacity of the proposed material compared to untreated limestone. Acidification of natural limestone results in the production of a calcium citrate component, which easily decomposes to high-purity fibrous CaO upon calcination at 850 °C. A novel technique based on a controlled atmosphere during the calcination step (two-step treatment) was developed to improve the activity of the CaO sorbent produced from the acidified precursor. A remarkable improvement in the adsorption activity was found for samples prepared using two-step calcination (initially treated in argon, followed by calcination in air) compared to those produced by one-step calcination. The in situ carbon formed during the primary calcination in an argon atmosphere was found to control thermal sintering and promote the dispersion of large agglomerates during burning off in the secondary calcination step under an air atmosphere. The influence of the primary calcination temperature was studied in detail for the acidified sorbents prepared by either one- or two-step calcination.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it