MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312718993 · doi:10.3176/oil.2000.3.05

PYROLYSIS AND THERMOGRAVIMETRIC INVESTIGATION OF THE MONGOLIAN KHOOT OIL SHALE

2000· article· en· W4312718993 on OpenAlexfundno aff
B. Avid, B Purevsuren, J Dugarjav

Bibliographic record

VenueOil Shale · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsOil shaleThermogravimetric analysisPyrolysisGeologyPetroleum engineeringShale oil extractionGeochemistryShale oilWaste managementChemical engineeringEngineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oil shales from eight deposits in the central economic region of Mongolia were characterized and their pyrolysis experiments and thermogravimetric study were carried out.The Khoot deposit oil shale was chosen as the best- quality one with maximum shale oil yield.The optimum conditions (heating temperature 550 °C, heating rate 92 °C/min) were determined.Shale oil fractions with different boiling temperature intervals and hard residue were obtained by using ordinary distillation.These products can be used as gasoline, diesel, oil materials and binding materials (bitumen-like hard residue) after isolation of organic bases, acids and phenolic compounds.The Khoot deposit oil shale was investigated by thermogravimetric analysis enabling 10 explain the mechanism of oil shale thermal destruction process in detail.Thermal decomposition had the characteristics of a first-order reaction with activation energy 22.98 kcal/mol (96.28 kJ/mol) calculated from the oil shale thermogram.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOil ShaleSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207