MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245901161 · doi:10.1121/1.4799337

Enhancing biofuel production by ultrasonics

2013· article· en· W4245901161 on OpenAlexaff
David Grewell, Melissa Montalbo‐Lomboy, Pryiyanka Chand

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of meetings on acoustics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiofuel production and bioconversion
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulp and paper industryBiofuelCelluloseCellulosic ethanolBiodieselBiodiesel productionBiomass (ecology)TransesterificationLigninStarchEnzymatic hydrolysisEthanol fuelLignocellulosic biomassHydrolysisWaste managementBiotechnologyChemistryFood scienceAgronomyOrganic chemistryEngineeringCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work evaluated the use of high-powered ultrasonics to enhance biofuel production in terms of efficiency and costs. A wide range of feed stocks, including corn, switchgrass, oleaginous yeast, and soybean oil were studied. The effect of ultrasonic pretreatment on the removal of lignin to allow hydrolysis of cellulose to fermentable sugars was studied. Many pretreatment techniques proved to be successful in enhancing lignin removal. For example, time of dissolution of ligno-cellulosic biomass in ionic liquids was reduced from hours to minutes, accompanied by a significant decrease in energy consumption compared to mechanical stirring. In addition, it was found that hydrolysis of corn starch could be greatly accelerated utilizing ultrasonics. Economic models showed that the technology, once implemented, would have a payback period of approximately 2.3 years. The work also explored biodiesel production using ultrasonics. It was seen that ultrasonics accelerated the transesterification process so that soybean oil could be converted to biodiesel in less than a minute, compared to 45 minutes using traditional methods.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.802

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of meetings on acousticsSame topicBiofuel production and bioconversionFrench-language works237,207