MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901598653 · doi:10.25071/10315/35360

Adsorbent-Adsorbate Pairs for Solar Thermal Energy Storage in Residential Heating Applications: A Comparative Study

2018· article· en· W2901598653 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Canadian Mechanical Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdsorption and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdsorptionThermal energy storageSolar energyMaterials scienceThermalEnergy storageEnvironmental scienceChemical engineeringNuclear engineeringChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the feasibility of using different adsorbent-adsorbate pairs in a thermal energy storage cycle to store solar energy for residential heating applications in Canada. Silica gel, activated carbon, activated aluminum, zeolite-4A, zeolite-5A and zeolite-13X adsorbents paired with methanol and water adsorbates are considered. Calculations are made to determine the volume, mass and cost of the adsorbent-adsorbate pair required to heat a house with four occupants. Zeolite 4A-water and zeolite 13X-water pairs are found to be the most economic (with an actual cost of 285 CAD and 374 CAD, respectively) and efficient (maximum heat of adsorption) adsorbent-adsorbate pairs with the minimum mass required, (290 kg and 226 kg, respectively) to meet the spatial heating requirements of the house.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.242 · 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