MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921359639 · doi:10.1002/aocs.12208

Diesel Precursors Via Catalytic Hydrothermal Deoxygenation of Aqueous Canola Oil Emulsion

2019· article· en· W2921359639 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard U. Ndubuisi, Sayeh Sinichi, Ya-Huei Cathy Chin, Levente L. Diósady

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Oil Chemists Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCatalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDiesel fuelDeoxygenationExtraction (chemistry)EmulsionAqueous solutionOxygenateYield (engineering)ChemistryChemical engineeringVegetable oil refiningPulp and paper industryCatalysisOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceBiodieselMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aqueous extraction for protein isolation from oilseeds is a promising alternative to the conventional hexane‐based solvent extraction widely used in the industry. However, during aqueous extraction, a stable oil‐in‐water emulsion is produced that results in decreased oil yield. We demonstrated the conversion of this aqueous extract into renewable hydrocarbons on 20%w/w Ni/C at 315 °C and at an initial hydrogen headspace pressure of 1.95 MPa. Moderate yield (>50%) and selectivity (~70%) of hydrocarbons within the diesel range were obtained within 12 hours of reaction without additional external hydrogen input. It was also shown that a prolonged experimental run at 305 °C can result in near‐complete conversion of triacylglycerol oil into diesel‐range hydrocarbons (70%) and oxygenates (9%) with selectivity of ~80%. Although the study demonstrates for the first time the possibility of integrating aqueous extraction of protein with renewable diesel production in a hydrothermal medium, the limitations and challenges experienced during this initial study justify additional work that is presently underway.

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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Oil Chemists SocietySame topicCatalysis and Hydrodesulfurization StudiesFrench-language works237,207