MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210611660 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2021-0185

Preparation of highly dispersed CuO-ZnO-ZrO<sub>2</sub> catalysts and their improved catalytic performance for hydrogenation of CO<sub>2</sub>

2022· article· en· W4210611660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jun Lu, Yan Zhang, Shuai Wang, Zhen Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatalysisCalcinationChemistryCitric acidSpace velocityMethanolStoichiometryBET theoryInorganic chemistryDispersion (optics)Specific surface areaNuclear chemistryX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyYield (engineering)Chemical engineeringSelectivityOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Highly dispersed CuO-ZnO-ZrO 2 (CZZ) catalysts were prepared by the citrate gel method. The structures of catalysts and precursors were characterized by XPS, BET, XRD, H 2 -TPR, H 2 -TPD, CO 2 -TPD, and TG-DTA. The effects of wet gel drying time and citric acid dosage on the catalyst structure were studied and compared with the catalysts prepared by the combustion method to investigate the performance of different catalysts for CO 2 hydrogenation to methanol. Studies have shown that prolonging the drying time of wet gel can effectively prevent the splashing of the catalyst during calcination. The BET surface area of the catalyst dried at 120 °C for 48 h is 44.8 m 2 /g, which is higher than that of the combustion method. When the amount of citric acid is equal to the stoichiometric ratio, the catalyst has the best performance. Under the conditions of 240 °C, 2.6 MPa, space velocity of 3600 h –1 , and H 2 /CO 2 volume ratio of 3, the space–time yield of methanol reaches 110.3 g/(kg h). Excessive citric acid will affect the dispersion of catalyst components and result in decomposition residue covering catalyst surface active sites, which is not conducive to CO 2 hydrogenation reaction.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

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 head0.007
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

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207