Effect of the oxidation of activated carbon by hydrogen peroxide on its catalytic activity in the regeneration of Co(<scp>II</scp>)<scp>TETA</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cobalt(II) triethylenetetramine (Co(II)TETA) formed by soluble cobalt(II) salt combining with triethylenetetramine will be used as a wet denitration technique since it can interact with nitric oxide to accomplish quick absorption of NO from gas phase. However, the oxygen in the flue gas will oxidize Co(II)TETA to Co(III) TETA, resulting in the reduction of denitrification efficiency. Activated carbon has been used to promote the regeneration of Co(II)TETA due to its unique surface characteristics. Hydrogen peroxide solution is utilized as a modifier in the carbon modification to improve the catalytic performance of activated carbon. The experiments demonstrate that the best regeneration efficiency of Co(II)TETA is gained by the modified carbon impregnated in 0.05 mol L −1 H 2 O 2 solution at 70°C for 12 h with a solid/liquid ratio of 1/50 (g/mL) followed being activated at 400°C for 2 h in N 2 . After being treated with hydrogen oxide solution, the surface area and acidity of the carbon is increased. Continuous experiments reveal that the NO removal efficiency gained by modified activated carbon is about 8.36% higher than that gained by the original carbon.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".