MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799579586 · doi:10.1177/0734242x18771180

Experimental investigation of nitric oxide removal from flue gas using hexamminecobalt(II) solution scrubbing in a pilot-scale facility

2018· article· en· W2799579586 on OpenAlexaff
Bing Han, Qinghai Li, Zhen Liu, Zhongchao Tan, Yanguo Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueWaste Management & Research The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Gas Emission Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsData scrubbingFlue gasWet scrubberChemistryNOxWaste managementProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringCombustionOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experimental investigation of operational parameters, including liquid/gas ratio (L/G), inlet nitric oxide (NO) concentration, reaction temperature, and pH value of absorbing agent, on NO removal efficiency with hexamminecobalt(II) solution scrubbing was conducted on a pilot-scale facility to search optimal operation conditions. The experimental results show that NO removal efficiency increased with the pH value of hexamminecobalt solution, while the improving rate dropped gradually. When the reaction temperature increased, the NO removal efficiency increased first and then decreased. At the same time, NO removal efficiency increased with the increasing of L/G and hexamminecobalt concentration, while the removal efficiency did not change much at low NO concentration. The pH of 10.4 and L/G of 16 L/m 3 were close to the optimal operation conditions, and the scrubbing temperature fell within a reasonable operation temperature. The experimental results can be used as a reference for the design and operation of scaled-up industrial devices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaste Management & Research The Journal for a Sustainable Circular EconomySame topicIndustrial Gas Emission ControlFrench-language works237,207