MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134832133 · doi:10.1002/smll.202007025

CO<sub>2</sub> Footprint of Thermal Versus Photothermal CO<sub>2</sub> Catalysis

2021· review· en· W3134832133 on OpenAlexafffund
Shenghua Wang, Athanasios A. Tountas, Wangbo Pan, Jianjiang Zhao, Le He, Wei Sun, Deren Yang, Geoffrey A. Ozin

Bibliographic record

VenueSmall · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAdvanced Photocatalysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSoochow UniversityTaiyuan University of TechnologyZhejiang UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaState Key Laboratory of Silicon MaterialsGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPhotothermal therapyProcess engineeringCatalysisFossil fuelMaterials scienceNanotechnologyEnvironmental scienceElectricityChemical engineeringChemistryOrganic chemistryPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transformation of CO2 into value‐added products via photothermal catalysis has become an increasingly popular route to help ameliorate the energy and environmental crisis derived from the continuing use of fossil fuels, as it can integrate light into well‐established thermocatalysis processes. The question however remains whether negative CO2 emission could be achieved through photothermal catalytic reactions performed in facilities driven by electricity mainly derived from fossil energy. Herein, we propose universal equations that describe net CO2 emissions generated from operating thermocatalysis and photothermal reverse water–gas shift (RWGS) and Sabatier processes for batch and flow reactors. With these reactions as archetype model systems, the factors that will determine the final amount of effluent CO2 can be determined. The results of this study could provide useful guidelines for the future development of photothermal catalytic systems for CO2 reduction.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations68
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmallSame topicAdvanced Photocatalysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207