MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091955619 · doi:10.1080/25726641.2020.1827675

Thermodynamic modelling of spodumene decrepitation

2020· article· en· W3091955619 on OpenAlexafffund
C.A. Pickles, O. Marzoughi

Bibliographic record

VenueMineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and Metallurgy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSpodumeneLithium (medication)AluminosilicateBriquetteLeaching (pedology)MetallurgyMaterials sciencePyrometallurgySulfuric acidChemistryMineralogyGeologySmeltingOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the demand for lithium metal and its associated compounds has been growing exponentially, mainly due to the increased consumption of lithium ion batteries. Consequently, to meet this demand, minerals such as spodumene have become the most important lithium-bearing resources. Although numerous methods have been studied for the extraction of lithium from spodumene, the conventional process of spodumene decrepitation followed by leaching in sulfuric acid, remains the proven commercial process. In the high temperature decrepitation process, α-spodumene is converted into β-spodumene and also some intermediate γ-spodumene can form. In the current research, a comprehensive thermodynamic analysis of the decrepitation of spodumene has been performed using HSC Chemistry® 7.1. Firstly, the thermodynamic data available in the literature for the various relevant lithium aluminosilicates was evaluated and then this data was incorporated into the HSC data base. Secondly, using the experimental data available in the literature, the non-ideal behaviour of spodumene was accounted for by the incorporation of activity coefficients. Finally, the model was applied to the decrepitation of both pure spodumene and also a spodumene concentrate. The modelled conversion results were in good agreement with the process data available in the literature.

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)0.001
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineral Processing and Extractive Metallurgy Transactions of the Institutions of Mining and MetallurgySame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207