MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of an Iron Pentacarbonyl Additive on Counterflow Natural Gas and Ethanol Flames

2015· article· en· W2517206525 on OpenAlexafffund
Abhishek Raj, Kang Pan, Huixiu Qi, Henry Zhu, John Z. Wen, Eric Croiset

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy & Fuels · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicAdvanced Combustion Engine Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsIron pentacarbonylMethaneCombustionChemistrySootAcetaldehydeAdiabatic flame temperaturePremixed flameAnalytical Chemistry (journal)CombustorFourier transform infrared spectroscopyDiffusion flameEthanolInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The addition of metallic precursors to flames evinces interest because of their potential ability to catalyze methane and ethanol combustion by means of supplemental gas-phase and surface reactions. A counterflow flame burner is used to spatially characterize and analyze the emissions from iron-pentacarbonyl-borne ethanol and methane combustion. Samples of the flue gases are obtained from these laminar and planar flames and are quantified using gas chromatography (GC) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, while solid particles are examined through X-ray diffraction (XRD). Measurements from ethanol and methane flames are compared and analyzed, to investigate the role of metal particles derived from iron pentacarbonyl. Experimental data demonstrate, in both flames, a significant influence of the additive on combustion emissions, such as NO and soot precursors. The addition of iron pentacarbonyl is found to be more effective in restricting soot precursors in methane flames compared to ethanol flames. An enhanced production of acetaldehyde in the ethanol flame is observed under catalytic conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy & FuelsSame topicAdvanced Combustion Engine TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207