Hydrocracking of Heavy Oil by Means of In Situ Prepared Ultradispersed Nickel Nanocatalyst
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 adopts a water-in-oil (w/o) microemulsion method for the in situ preparation of ultradispersed metallic nickel (Ni 0 ) nanocatalyst in heavy oil and assesses its hydrocracking activity. Catalyst preparation involved reducing Ni 2+ added to the water pools of the heavy oil matrix in the form of aqueous Ni(NO 3 ) 2 solution using hydrazine. The volume of the aqueous precursors was limited to values which corresponded to visually stable single heavy oil phase. The product particles were collected by addition of toluene and characterized using XRD, TEM, and EDX. These techniques confirmed the formation of nickel nanoparticles of 22 ± 5 nm mean diameter. The hydrocracking activity of the as-prepared ultradispersed catalyst was evaluated using a semibatch reactor setup under 110 bar of hydrogen and 370 °C. Although no presulfiding was performed, XRD of the spent catalyst confirmed the formation of Ni 3 S 2 nanoparticles with a mean particle size of the same range as the Ni 0 particles. Results showed 2-fold improvement in the gaseous fractions, around 47% conversion of the residue, more than 70% reduction in the resins, around 50% reduction in the asphaltenes and an increase in aromatics and saturates in the presence of the ultradispersed catalyst.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it