MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763002496 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00418

Desorption of harmful hydrocarbon compounds in soil using micron-sized magnetic particles and high-frequency magnetic fields

2017· article· en· W2763002496 on OpenAlexafffund
Bailey Tye, Rushi Vyas

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMinerals Flotation and Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCMC Microsystems
KeywordsDiesel fuelBTEXGasolineDesorptionHydrocarbonEnvironmental remediationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryEnvironmental chemistryMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceContaminationEthylbenzeneAdsorptionTolueneOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research looks at the use of high frequency (HF) magnetic fields to desorb/reduce harmful chemical compounds within gasoline and diesel that commonly leak out of underground storage tanks. Using a multi-strand coil design, measured magnetic fields of over 3 kilo-amperes per meter are generated at an optimal frequency of 117 kHz without skin-depth losses, and without the use of expensive super-conductors or liquid-cooled mechanisms. This high frequency magnetic field is successfully used in non-contact-based magnetic heating and desorption of Gasoline and Diesel mixed with sand, water and easily-dispersible, benign micrometer-sized iron filings, used as a magnetic absorber. Gas chromatography (GC) tests done on magnetically-heated Gasoline-soil and Diesel-soil mixtures show desorption/reduction of gasoline and diesel by 44% and 51% respectively, but desorption/reduction of harmful BTEX compounds and other chemical irritants within Gasoline and Diesel by 28-66% after only 80 minutes of magnetic heating. Review of remediation/desorption methods show magnetic fields fare favorably in comparison to other methods that require longer treatment period or the use of secondary pollutants at reducing hydrocarbon and BTEX compounds in them.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicMinerals Flotation and Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207