MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175308254 · doi:10.1002/ceat.202100180

Advanced Evaluation of a Biomass Externally Fired Hydrogen Production Combined Cycle

2021· article· en· W3175308254 on OpenAlex
Anahita Moharramian, Amin Habibzadeh, Saeed Soltani, Marc A. Rosen, Seyed Mohammad Seyed Mahmoudi

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

VenueChemical Engineering & Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermodynamic and Exergetic Analyses of Power and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExergyGas compressorExergy efficiencyProcess engineeringCombined cycleWood gas generatorEnvironmental scienceHydrogen productionGas turbinesHydrogenBiomass (ecology)TurbineThermodynamicsWaste managementNuclear engineeringEngineeringChemistryMechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Hydrogen is produced by an externally fired combined cycle and can be consumed in different ways. For the present study, both common and realistic thermodynamic and exergoeconomic analyses were applied. With the realistic method, the results are not necessarily in accordance with common analyses. The compressor pressure ratio ( r p ) and the gas turbine inlet temperature (TIT) are the varying parameters in common analyses. Varying r p identifies optimum energy and exergy efficiencies. With the common exergy analysis, the gasifier and the heat recovery steam generator have low exergy efficiencies, but the modified analysis assigns high exergy efficiencies to them.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score0.617

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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