MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modeling, equilibrium and kinetics of CO2 adsorption in LTA zeolite obtained from clay

2021· article· en· W3215506740 on OpenAlexaff
V. H. S. Ramos, Diógenes R. L. Vedoy, Paulo Cardozo Carvalho de Araújo, José Jailton Marques, Paulo Henrique Leite Quintela, Edilson de Jesús

Bibliographic record

VenueCerâmica · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicZeolite Catalysis and Synthesis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversidade Estadual de MaringáFundação de Apoio à Pesquisa e à Inovação Tecnológica do Estado de SergipeConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsZeolitePhysisorptionAdsorptionCalcinationChemical engineeringFreundlich equationHydrothermal circulationMaterials scienceFourier transform infrared spectroscopyChemistryNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discussed the synthesis of LTA zeolite from Pinheiro clay (PIN) aiming for adsorption of CO 2 . To obtain the LTA-PIN zeolite, the PIN was submitted to acid treatment, followed by calcination and hydrothermal treatment. These treatments promoted the reorganization of the crystalline structure of the PIN, leading to the LTA-PIN zeolite with 95.79% purity confirmed by XRD, SEM, XRF, and FTIR results. The performance of the LTA-PIN zeolite was similar to the one of the standard LTA zeolite. The CO 2 adsorption by the zeolites could be properly described by the pseudo-second-order kinetic and Freundlich isotherm models, suggesting that physisorption was the main mechanism responsible for the deposition of CO 2 at the surface of the zeolites. According to regeneration results, LTA-PIN zeolite can be reused five times without significant loss of CO 2 adsorption capacity, contrary to the 12% reduction in CO 2 adsorption capacity presented by the LTA-standard zeolite.

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 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 score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerâmicaSame topicZeolite Catalysis and SynthesisFrench-language works237,207