MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892220097 · doi:10.3390/catal8090373

Value-Added Products from Urea Glycerolysis Using a Heterogeneous Biosolids-Based Catalyst

2018· article· en· W2892220097 on OpenAlexafffund
Mattia Bartoli, Chengyong Zhu, Michael Chae, David C. Bressler

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysts · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCarbon dioxide utilization in catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsBioFuelNet Canada
KeywordsCatalysisBiosolidsChemistryGlycerolHydrolysisGlycidolSelectivityUreaPulp and paper industryChemical engineeringNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistryWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although thermal hydrolysis of digested biosolids is an extremely promising strategy for wastewater management, the process economics are prohibitive. Here, a biosolids-based material generated through thermal hydrolysis was used as a catalyst for urea glycerolysis performed under several conditions. The catalytic system showed remarkable activity, reaching conversion values of up to 70.8 ± 0.9% after six hours, at 140 °C using a catalyst/glycerol weight ratio of 9% and an air stream to remove NH3 formed during the process. Temperature played the most substantial role among reaction parameters; increasing temperature from 100 °C to 140 °C improved conversion by 35% and glycidol selectivity by 22%. Furthermore, the catalyst retained good activity even after the fourth catalytic run (conversion rate of 56.4 ± 1.3%) with only a slight decrease in glycidol selectivity. Thus, the use of a biosolids-based catalyst may facilitate conversion of various glycerol sources (i.e., byproduct streams from biodiesel production) into value-added products such as glycidol, and may also improve the economic feasibility of using thermal hydrolysis for treatment of biosolids.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalystsSame topicCarbon dioxide utilization in catalysisFrench-language works237,207