Two‐step thermal decomposition mechanism of phosphogypsum for resource utilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, the reduction–oxidation two‐step method was used for investigating the resource utilization of phosphogypsum. The influences of different decomposition conditions were investigated, including the reducing process and oxidizing process. The reductive organic sulphide in lignite reacted with CaSO4 and improved the CaSO4 decomposition rate. High Fe2(SO4)3 content and anhydrous air flow rate promoted the formation of Fe–Ca–Ox, decreasing the CaSO4 decomposition rate. H2O derived from CH4 reacted with lignite to consume the solid reducing agent. In the reducing process, CaSO4 reacted with CH4 and lignite to form CO, CO2, H2O, and CaS. In the oxidizing process, CaS was mainly oxidized into CaO, SO2, and element S. Through a two‐step decomposition process (reduction with CH4 and oxidation with air), the decomposition temperature of phosphogypsum decreases and the decomposition efficiency is improved. Meanwhile, the residual lignite was oxidized into CO and CO2. Therefore, it is meaningful and valuable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".