Kinetics of low‐temperature Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis on cobalt catalysts: Are both slurry autoclave and tubular packed‐bed reactors adequate to collect relevant data at lab‐scale?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To verify the equivalence of kinetic data obtained in lab‐scale packed‐bed and slurry reactors for low‐temperature Fischer‐Tropsch synthesis over cobalt‐based catalysts, the same Co/γ‐Al 2 O 3 catalyst was tested in both reactors, studying the effects of the process conditions (temperature, pressure, syngas composition, gas space velocity) on CO conversion rate and on product distribution. Then, both a lumped CO conversion rate equation and detailed kinetics (i.e. describing the rates of reactants conversion and product formation) were developed based on the data collected in the packed‐bed tubular reactor. The two models were finally used to simulate the performance of the slurry autoclave. By describing the slurry autoclave as a continuous stirred tank reactor and the packed‐bed as plug‐flow reactor, the kinetic information collected with the two reactors is fully equivalent and can be used indiscriminately to describe the rates of reactant consumption and product formation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".