MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897274758 · doi:10.3390/nano8100822

Use of Plasma-Synthesized Nano-Catalysts for CO Hydrogenation in Low-Temperature Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis: Effect of Catalyst Pre-Treatment

2018· article· en· W2897274758 on OpenAlexafffund
James Aluha, Stéphane Gutierrez, F. Gitzhofer, Nicolas Abatzoglou

Bibliographic record

VenueNanomaterials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsFischer–Tropsch processCatalysisSpace velocityX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyDiesel fuelScanning electron microscopeMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Transmission electron microscopySelectivityParticle sizeUltra-low-sulfur dieselGasolineNanoparticleNuclear chemistryChemical engineeringChemistryNanotechnologyOrganic chemistryPhysical chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was done on the effect of temperature and catalyst pre-treatment on CO hydrogenation over plasma-synthesized catalysts during the Fischer–Tropsch synthesis (FTS). Nanometric Co/C, Fe/C, and 50%Co-50%Fe/C catalysts with BET specific surface area of ~80 m2 g–1 were tested at a 2 MPa pressure and a gas hourly space velocity (GHSV) of 2000 cm3 h−1 g−1 of a catalyst (at STP) in hydrogen-rich FTS feed gas (H2:CO = 2.2). After pre-treatment in both H2 and CO, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) showed that the used catalysts shifted from a mono-modal particle-size distribution (mean ~11 nm) to a multi-modal distribution with a substantial increase in the smaller nanoparticles (~5 nm), which was statistically significant. Further characterization was conducted by scanning electron microscopy (SEM with EDX elemental mapping), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). The average CO conversion at 500 K was 18% (Co/C), 17% (Fe/C), and 16% (Co-Fe/C); 46%, 37%, and 57% at 520 K; and 85%, 86% and 71% at 540 K respectively. The selectivity of Co/C for C5+ was ~98% with 8% gasoline, 61%, diesel and 28% wax (fractions) at 500 K; 22% gasoline, 50% diesel, and 19% wax at 520 K; and 24% gasoline, 34% diesel, and 11% wax at 540 K, besides CO2 and CH4 as by-products. Fe-containing catalysts manifested similar trends, with a poor conformity to the Anderson–Schulz–Flory (ASF) product distribution.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanomaterialsSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207