Study on the cracking of carbon anodes used in aluminium industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Carbon anodes are used in aluminium electrolysis. Their quality plays a major role in the stability of cell operation and energy consumption. The improvement of the quality of carbon anodes is essential to respond to the many challenges the aluminium industry is facing with respect to issues related to carbon loss, energy use, cell performance, and production cost, especially for high amperage cells. The presence of cracks increases the anode resistivity, and, as a result, power consumption, production cost, and greenhouse gas emissions also increase. Therefore, it is important to know how the cracks form during anode production. An industrial measurement campaign was carried out at the Aluminerie Alouette Inc. (AAI) plant in Sept‐Îles, Québec, Canada. The effect of raw materials (type of coke, pitch, and butts), vibro‐compaction (vibro‐compactor type, balloon pressure, and vibration time), and the position of anodes in the baking furnace on anode cracking was investigated. It was found that the anode centre is the region that contains the most cracks compared to other parts of the anode. The cracks in the horizontal direction are more predominant than those in other directions. The raw materials and the operating parameters of each anode production step affect anode cracking.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".