A review on potential use of hydrogen in aviation applications
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
In this paper, utilisation of hydrogen as an alternative aviation fuel is reviewed, along with some past and present-day activities, covering three critical topics of energy consumption, environmental impact and emission related cost. It also evaluates the energy consumptions, environmental impacts, emission-related costs of jet fuel A, natural gas and hydrogen from selected production methods in short and long distance aircrafts. Furthermore, costs and efficiencies of hydrogen production from steam methane reforming and wind, PV, and hydro-based electrolysis are compared for a more detailed comparative assessment. Aviation fuel evaluation results show that hydrogen from hydro- and wind-based electrolysis is a promising clean, efficient and less costly candidate among the selected fuels in this study. The assessment study shows that compared to selected hydrogen production options, hydro-based electrolysis is the most advantageous one.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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