MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385334570 · doi:10.1021/acs.iecr.3c00192

Syngas Quality Enhancement by CO<sub>2</sub> Injection during the Co-Gasification of Biomass and Plastic

2023· article· en· W4385334570 on OpenAlexafffund
Joshua Cullen, Kang Kang, Naomi B. Klinghoffer

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityWestern University
FundersMitacsWestern University
KeywordsSyngastar (computing)Wood gas generatorWaste managementHigh-density polyethyleneBiomass (ecology)Thermogravimetric analysisCharRaw materialProducer gasMaterials scienceCarbon fibersSolid fuelEnvironmental scienceFuel gasChemical engineeringCombustionPulp and paper industryPolyethyleneChemistryPyrolysisOrganic chemistryComposite numberCatalysisCoalComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gasification technologies have been considered to be viable waste enhancement avenues for diverting mixed nonrecycled plastic-containing waste from landfills. The main objective of this work was to investigate CO 2 utilization with the air gasification of mixed plastics and biomass. High-density polyethylene (HDPE) was co-gasified with Douglas fir, air, and CO 2 in a semibatch updraft gasifier with supporting thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA) testing. Possible reaction mechanisms of the mixed feedstock with CO 2 injections were discussed by comparing the gas, tar, and char products of the gasifier with the TGA data. Injecting 10 and 20 vol % CO 2 in air gasification with an air to fuel ratio of 0.3 improved carbon conversion from the tar to the gas phase by 28 and 43 carbon weight %, respectively. CO 2 addition was an effective moderator of the H 2 /CO ratio, beneficial to tar reduction and enhanced the energy density of the syngas, improving the tunability of the gasification process.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207