MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525301896 · doi:10.1021/ie000990x

Mass Transfer and Bioethanol Production in an External-Loop Liquid-Lift Bioreactor

2001· article· en· W2525301896 on OpenAlexafffund
Gerald D. Stang, Douglas G. Macdonald, Gordon A. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBioreactorFermentationOleic acidChemistrySpargingChromatographyMass transferBiofuelMass transfer coefficientEthanolPulp and paper industryChemical engineeringBiochemistryWaste managementOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel, spinning-sparger, external-loop, liquid-lift bioreactor (ELLB) has been studied for the purpose of enhancing the production of bioethanol by simultaneous mass transfer and fermentation. Oleic acid was used to produce circulatory fluid flow in the ELLB and also to absorb ethanol from the aqueous, fermentation media. The overall ethanol mass-transfer coefficient ( K C a ) was found to vary between 7.0 × 10 -7 and 3.0 × 10 -4 s -1 . K C a increased with the sparger spinning speed, oleic acid flow rate, and ethanol concentration in the aqueous phase. Oleic acid holdup (φ L ) in the bioreactor increased in a similar manner for each of these independent variables. Both K C a and φ L were empirically fit to extensive experimental data sets using power-law models. Two batch fermentation experiments demonstrated improved production of bioethanol when oleic acid was used to remove high concentrations of ethanol from the fermentation broth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207