CuO‐CeO<sub>2</sub>/ZSM‐5 composites for reactive adsorption of hydrogen sulphide at high temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The high‐temperature H2S removal at 500–700 °C was conducted over CuO‐CeO2/ZSM‐5 composites prepared with sol‐gel method. 7Cu3Ce/ZSM‐5 partially reacting at 500 °C yielded Cu7S4 and Cu2S. The major sulphidation products at 600 °C were Ce2O2S, Cu2S, CuS, and S. Sulphidation of 7Cu3Ce/ZSM‐5 at 700 °C yielded Ce2S3, Cu2S, Cu2S, and S. Sulphidation of 7Cu3Ce/ZSM‐5 with 20 % H2 and 20 % CO generated the same products Ce2O2S, Cu2S, Cu2S, and S. Increase in the degree of crystallinity of 7Cu3Ce/ZSM‐5 resulted in the decrease of sulphur capacity during the sulphidation and regeneration process. Experimental results showed that the activity of CuO improved by adding Ce; 7Cu3Ce/ZSM‐5 performed the optimal sulphiation behaviour at 600 °C with sulphur capacity of 1429 μmol/g (micromoles of sulphur per gram) due to the synergy of CuO and CeO2. H2 repressed sulphur removal, causing the reduction of sulphur capacity from 1429 to 1014 μmol/g. CO had little impact on sulphidation reaction; sulphur capacity only reduced from 1429 to 1221 μmol/g due to the presence of 20 % CO.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".