Understanding the Co-Pyrolysis Behavior of Indonesian Oil Sands and Corn Straw
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, co-pyrolysis of Indonesian oil sands and corn straw was investigated to evaluate the potential synergetic effect. Thermogravimetric analysis was conducted to study the thermal decomposition behaviors of individual and blend feedstocks. Improved pyrolysis characteristics and higher conversion were observed, indicating a remarkable synergetic effect. Moreover, co-pyrolysis experiments were carried out using a fixed bed reactor. The results showed that the co-pyrolysis liquid product yield was increased, while the formation of solid residue was reduced, suggesting a higher conversion. The liquid product characterization by gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy also indicated the significant synergetic effect on the liquid chemical composition. Valuable phenols and alcohols were increased, while unstable aldehydes were decreased, suggesting the chemical interactions between two feedstocks during the co-pyrolysis process. The yield improvement and compositional variations of the co-pyrolysis liquid product were beneficial for its use as fuel and chemical feedstock.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".