Comparisons of Solid By-Products Generated from Thermal Plasma Incineration Ash Melting Systems by Plasma Torch and Three-Phase Submerged Arc Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Solid waste disposal has become a major concern since there are a limited number of landfill disposal sites. In the past, incineration of solid wastes was considered a solution to the landfill site limitation since solid waste volume can be reduced to 1/6 by conversion to incinerator ash, and heat and electricity recovery from the incineration processes can be attained. The landfill of fly and bottom ashes has been considered a potential environmental hazard due to leaching of heavy metals from the ashes after landfill, hence recycling them as construction material is beneficial not only economically but also is less impacting on the environment in long term. In this work, two different thermal plasma processes for ash volume reduction (approximately 60 to 70% of the volume of incinerator ashes) based on the plasma torch and submerged three-phase arc processes were compared based on the treatment of ash from the same incineration source. Detailed solid product detoxicity characteristics for each process will be presented and compared.
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 | 0.001 | 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".