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 CaSO 4 and improved the CaSO 4 decomposition rate. High Fe 2 (SO 4 ) 3 content and anhydrous air flow rate promoted the formation of Fe–Ca–Ox, decreasing the CaSO 4 decomposition rate. H 2 O derived from CH 4 reacted with lignite to consume the solid reducing agent. In the reducing process, CaSO 4 reacted with CH 4 and lignite to form CO, CO 2 , H 2 O, and CaS. In the oxidizing process, CaS was mainly oxidized into CaO, SO 2 , and element S. Through a two‐step decomposition process (reduction with CH 4 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 CO 2 . 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 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".