Effects of calcination atmosphere on the performance of the co‐precipitated <scp>Ni</scp> / <scp> ZrO <sub>2</sub> </scp> catalyst in dry reforming of methane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effects of the calcination atmospheres (H 2 , N 2 , and O 2 ) on the performance of Ni/ZrO 2 catalysts prepared by the conventional co‐precipitation method for dry reforming of methane (DRM) were investigated in this work. The catalyst calcined in O 2 atmosphere (NZO) showed the highest Ni dispersion (10.99%), followed by the one calcined in N 2 (NZN, 8.14%) and H 2 atmosphere (NZH, 5.97%). Additionally, NZO and NZN exhibited relatively stronger metal‐support interaction than NZH and the incorporated Ni species on NZO and NZN were capable of stabilizing the metastable tetragonal ZrO 2 , which possessed more oxygen vacancies and higher oxygen mobility than monoclinic ZrO 2 . The evaluation results revealed that the activity of the employed catalysts displayed the following sequence: NZO > NZN > NZH, which was mainly determined by their Ni dispersion. The amount of carbon deposited on NZO (2.2%) was less than that on NZN (5.0%), and the deactivation rate of NZO (0.47% per hour) was slower than that of NZN (0.53% per hour). Due to its low CH 4 conversion and the weak metal‐support interaction, NZH showed the least carbon deposition (1.1%) and the slowest deactivation rate (0.37% per hour) among the representative catalysts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".