Sequential modular simulation of circulating fluidized bed reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bypassing the mathematical complexity of equation‐oriented approaches in predicting the performance of chemical reactors has recently stimulated a significant amount of interest. Among chemical reactors, circulating fluidized bed reactors (CFBRs) have secured an important role in a broad range of applications in energy sectors due to their advantages, including high fluid‐solid contact efficiency, uniform temperature, and enhanced heat and mass transfer rates. Accordingly, modelling and predicting the performance of these reactors is of great importance. In this study, a sequence‐based model was developed to predict the behaviour of CFBRs. Complex phenomena in CFBRs were mimicked by two sub‐models, namely the hydrodynamics module, which addressed the physical changes, and the reaction kinetics module, which described the chemical evolution of species. The performance of the proposed model was validated with a library of catalytic ozone decomposition experimental data in CFBRs. This work introduces a new infrastructure for modelling CFBRs, which may be combined with the current process simulation software, such as Aspen Plus©, for advanced process modelling applications.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".