Kinetics of simultaneous HDS of DBT and 4‐MDBT/4,6‐DMDBT over CoMoP/γ‐Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>catalysts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A series of CoMo/γ‐Al2O3 catalysts were prepared with an addition of 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, or 1.5 % phosphorus pentaoxide to investigate the influence of phosphorus addition on the simultaneous hydrodesulphurization (HDS) of refractory sulphur compounds. Two sets of HDS experiments were carried out using sulphur bearing model compounds: (i) DBT (dibenzothiophene) with 4‐MDBT (4‐methyl dibenzothiophene) and (ii) DBT (dibenzothiophene) with 4,6‐DMDBT (4,6‐dimethyl dibenzothiophene). The Langmuir‐Hinshelwood mechanism based kinetics model was developed from the experimental conversion and product distribution data for simultaneous HDS of the two sulphur compounds via direct desulphurization (DDS) and hydrogenation (HYD) routes. The kinetic model fits the experimental data quite adequately for all the species. The HDS rate for DBT was found to be approximately 2 and 7 times higher than that estimated for 4‐MDBT and 4,6‐DMDBT, respectively. Enhancement of HDS rate by P addition was observed up to 0.01 g/g (1.0 wt%) P2O5 while a higher amount of P is not advantageous. A marginal preference towards HYD pathway was observed for the HDS of 4,6‐DMDBT while the DDS route was predominant during the HDS of DBT and 4‐MDBT.The trends in values of the rate constants estimated by the Langmuir‐Hinshelwood kinetic model compared well with pseudo‐first rate constants.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".