MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084588188 · doi:10.3390/recycling5030023

On the Production of Potassium Carbonate from Cocoa Pod Husks

2020· article· en· W3084588188 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueRecycling · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCocoa and Sweet Potato Agronomy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuskPoint of deliveryBiomass (ecology)Potassium carbonateEnvironmental scienceWaste managementAgronomyPulp and paper industryChemistryBiologyEngineeringBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cocoa beans are found inside an outer husk; 60% of the cocoa fruit is the outer husk, which is a waste biomass. The husk cannot be used directly as a soil amendment as it promotes the fungal black pod disease, which reduces crop yield. The pods are segregated from the trees, and their plant nutrient value is wasted. This is particularly true for the small acreage farmers in West Africa. Cocoa pod husk is well suited to be used as a biomass source for electricity production. The waste ash is rich in potassium, which can be converted in various chemical products, most notably, high-purity potassium carbonate. This study reviews the information known about cocoa and cocoa pod husk, and considers the socio-economic implications of creating a local economy based on collecting the cocoa pod husk for electricity production, coupled with the processing of the waste ash into various products. The study demonstrates that the concept is feasible, and also identifies the local conditions required to create this sustainable economic process.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.176 · 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