MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081049899 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23870

Modelling heterogeneous photocatalytic oxidation using suspended <scp>TiO<sub>2</sub></scp> in a photoreactor working in continuous mode: Application to dynamic irradiation conditions simulating typical days in July and February

2020· article· en· W3081049899 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. Plantard, Chloé Dezani, Enrique Ribeiro, Reoyo-Prats Brice, V. Goetz

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar Cells
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPhotocatalysisIrradiationDegradation (telecommunications)Environmental scienceIntermittencyProcess engineeringMaterials scienceFlux (metallurgy)Computer scienceEnvironmental engineeringMeteorologyChemistryEngineeringPhysicsCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Compared to more conventional techniques, advanced oxidation processes (AOP) hold significant promise in terms of elimination of organic (especially persistent) compounds and microorganisms (disinfection) in wastewater. If the objective is to power these processes using solar energy, we need to be able to manage the intermittency in the solar resource. This is an essential step for design and to ensure efficient operation of the treatment processes. As solar radiation is inherently variable due to day/night cycles, seasonal cycles, and weather meteorological conditions, solar AOP performances are difficult to establish using conventional measures. To address this gap, we carry out experimental campaigns under controlled conditions and develop modelling tools capable of describing dynamic‐mode photocatalytic degradation. Here we develop a way to capture the responses of a photoreactor subjected to various stresses, including irradiation conditions, via an LED panel. Using a model that considers the influence of UV flux density and pollutant concentration made, it was possible to represent photoreactor responses under different irradiation conditions and feeds (concentration or flow at the input). The ultimate objective is to study the photocatalytic capacity of the photoreactor under irradiation conditions simulating a real day of sunshine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicTiO2 Photocatalysis and Solar CellsFrench-language works237,207