MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2567495414 · doi:10.1002/aic.15621

The analysis of solubility, absorption kinetics of CO<sub>2</sub> absorption into aqueous 1‐diethylamino‐2‐propanol solution

2016· article· en· W2567495414 on OpenAlexaff
Helei Liu, Min Xiao, Zhiwu Liang, Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolubilityAqueous solutionChemistryAbsorption (acoustics)KineticsPartial pressureDesorptionPropanolCatalysisThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceChromatographyOrganic chemistryAdsorptionEthanol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this present work, the CO 2 absorption performance of aqueous 1‐diethylamino‐2‐propanol (1DEA2P) solution was studied with respect to CO 2 equilibrium solubility, absorption kinetics, and absorption heat. The equilibrium solubility of CO 2 in 2M 1DEA2P solution was measured over the temperature range from 298 to 333 K and CO 2 partial pressure range from 8 to101 kPa. The absorption kinetics data were developed and analyzed using the base‐catalyzed hydration mechanism and artificial neural network models (radial basis function neural network [RBFNN] and back‐propagation neural network [BPNN] models) with an acceptable absolute average deviation of 10% for base‐catalyzed hydration mechanism, 2.6% for RBFNN model and 1.77% for BPNN model, respectively. The CO 2 absorption heat of 1DEA2P was estimated to be −43.6 kJ/mol. In addition, the ions (1DEA2P, 1DEA2PH + , , CO 3 2− ) speciation plots of the 1DEA2P‐CO 2 ‐H 2 O system were developed to further understand the reaction process of 1DEA2P with CO 2 . Based on a comparison with conventional amines (e.g., MEA, DEA, MDEA) and alternative amines (i.e., 1DMA2P and 4‐(diethylamino)−2‐butanol [DEAB]), 1DEA2P exhibited good performance with respect to CO 2 equilibrium solubility, reaction kinetics, and CO 2 absorption heat. Meanwhile, the overall evaluation of 1DEA2P for application in CCS in terms of absorption and desorption is presented, giving helpful information for the screening of these novel amines. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 63: 2694–2704, 2017

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)0.001
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations52
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207