MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212997306 · doi:10.24018/ejeng.2020.5.8.1929

Waste Management of Spent Petroleum Refinery Catalyst

2020· article· en· W4212997306 on OpenAlexaff
Isam Al-Zubaidi, Congning Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Engineering and Technology Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefineryRefining (metallurgy)CatalysisOil refineryWaste managementReuseCokeHazardous wasteFluid catalytic crackingPrecious metalPetroleumEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceChemistryEngineeringMetallurgyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petroleum refinery uses many catalysts such as hydroprocessing catalyst HPC, fluid catalytic cracking catalyst FCCC, reforming catalyst RC, etc. During the refining processes, the catalysts are deactivated; the spent catalysts are regarded as hazardous toxic materials due to heavy metals, coke, other poisonous compounds, and hydrocarbons. Huge amount of spent catalysts SC is generated which is expected to increase with expansion capacities of available refineries processes. This paper is reviewing the mechanisms of refining catalyst and the deactivation processes and focusing on spent catalysts management. Management of spent catalyst includes four main options; select the catalysts which reduce the generation of SC by switching to more environment friendly, longer lifetime and less toxic catalyst during the refining process; regenerate the SC; and precious metal recovery should be explored and reuse for other applications. The selection can be based on many factors such as safety, environment, mobility, etc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Engineering and Technology ResearchSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207