MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586732805 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.6b04405

Production and Characterization of Pyrolysis Oil from Sawmill Residues in an Auger Reactor

2017· article· en· W2586732805 on OpenAlexafffund
Sadegh Papari, Kelly Hawboldt, Robert Helleur

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of NewfoundlandCanada Foundation for InnovationBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsPyrolysisSoftwoodSawdustChemistryYield (engineering)Pulp and paper industryHardwoodVolumetric flow ratePyrolysis oilInert gasMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryComposite materialBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the significant process variables of a pilot auger reactor (i.e., temperature, feed flow rate, and the vacuum fan speed) are investigated to optimize pyrolysis oil (py-oil) yield and properties. The auger reactor uses steel shot as a heat carrier and operates without inert carrier gas. For the pyrolysis of softwood shavings, the optimum conditions are 450–475 °C temperature, a 4 kg/h feed flow rate, and a 2415 rpm vacuum fan speed producing an oil yield of 53%. The water content of the oil was minimized under these conditions to 24–26% and produced a single phase liquid. Hardwood sawdust (HW), Softwood shavings (SW), and Softwood Bark (SB) were pyrolyzed at these conditions to compare py-oil yield and chemical and physical characteristics, such as chemical composition, water content, total acid number (TAN), pH, density, viscosity, solids content, and HHV. The chemical components in py-oil were identified by GC-MS.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207