Iron-Speciation Control of Chalcopyrite Dissolution from a Carbonatite Derived Concentrate with Acidic Ferric Sulphate Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms involved in the dissolution of chalcopyrite from a carbonatite concentrate in a ferric sulphate solution at pH 1.0, 1.5 and 1.8, and temperatures 25 °C and 50 °C were investigated. Contrary to expectations and thermodynamic predictions according to which low pH would favour high Cu dissolution, the opposite was observed. The dissolution was also highly correlated to the temperature. CuFeS2 phase dissolution produced intermediate Cu rich phases: CuS, Cu2S and Cu5FeS4, which appeared to envelop CuFeS2. Thermodynamic prediction revealed CuS to be refractory and could hinder dissolution. CuFeS2 phase solid-state dissolution process was further discussed. Free Fe3+ and its complexes (Fe(HSO4)2+, Fe(SO4)2– and FeSO4+ were responsible for Cu dissolution, which increased with increasing pH and temperature. The dissolution improved at pH 1.8 rather than 1.0 due to the increase of (Fe(HSO4)2+, Fe(SO4)2– and FeSO4+, which were also the predominating species at a higher temperature. The fast and linear first dissolution stage was attributed to the combined effect of Fe3+ and its complex (Fe(HSO4)2+, while Fe(SO4)2– was the main species for the second Cu dissolution stage characterised by a slow rate.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".