MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808482171 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23257

Kinetics and mechanism of low‐concentration CO<sub>2</sub> adsorption on solid amine in a humid confined space

2018· article· en· W2808482171 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenting Si, Sha Ye, Dongxiao Zhang, Bin Yang, Yang Hou, Zhongjian Li, Xingwang Zhang, Jingke Zhu, Lecheng Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAdsorptionPolyethylenimineChemistryKineticsActivation energyBicarbonateAmine gas treatingAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Inorganic chemistryPhysical chemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The kinetics and mechanism of low‐concentration CO 2 adsorption on a solid‐supported polyethylenimine (PEI) adsorbent in a humid confined space were investigated, where the content of CO 2 was about 0.4 % (v). A flow system, equipped with a dew point meter and IR gas analyzer connected in series for online measurement, was developed and the co‐adsorption performance of CO 2 and H 2 O was analyzed. It was found that the H 2 O adsorption capacity and activation energy were not significantly changed when 0.4 % (v) CO 2 was applied in the co‐adsorption process, indicating that the effect of dilute CO 2 could be neglected. However, the CO 2 adsorption capacity increased with the assistance of H 2 O, and then it decreased slightly when the H 2 O content in air flow was above 1.56 % (v). This implied that the adsorption activation energy of CO 2 could be significantly reduced due to the existence of H 2 O in air flow. The direct formation of bicarbonate on the supported PEI adsorbent was favoured for the co‐adsorption process of CO 2 and H 2 O.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207