Extraction of niobium in one step from tin slag by <scp> NH <sub>4</sub> F‐HCl </scp> leaching process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Niobium and tantalum are generally found together in nature in ores such as columbite, tantalite, and pyrochlore. These ores can occasionally associate with cassiterite, the tin ore. The pyrometallurgical processes of cassiterite produces a slag that can contain Nb and Ta from the associated ores. Cassiterite processing for tin extraction has generated a considerable quantity of residue. This work aims to study the extraction of Nb from tin slag while leaving the Ta solid. The process of separation consists in one step by leaching using a combined solution of HCl‐NH 4 F. The slag was characterized by X‐ray fluorescence (EDXRF), atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP‐OES), X‐ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy/energy dispersive spectroscopy (SEM/EDS), and granulometric analysis. The effect of parameters of the leaching processes was investigated, such as the time of the process, HCl concentration, liquid‐to‐solid ratio, temperature, and salt‐to‐slag ratio. It was possible to recover 100% of Nb and 5% of Ta in liquor of leaching within 4 h, at 85°C, using an L:S ratio of 20:1, NH 4 F:slag ratio of 0.12 g, and HCl concentration equal to 9.79 mol/L.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it