Optical Characterization of RF Plasma Torch for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Treatment Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decade, plasma waste treatment has become a more prominent technology due to increasing problems with waste disposal and realizing opportunities to generate valuable co-products. Plasma waste treatment extensively uses atmospheric pressure (RF) inductive coupled plasma (ICP) torches. In situ Optical Emission Spectroscopy (OES) is used to evaluate the developed RF ICP torch for Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) treatment and ascertain the plasma parameters to understand the physical mechanism involved. The argon plasma jet's electron temperature and plasma density outside the torch chamber are calculated using the Boltzmann plot and Stark broadening at different gas flow rates, and RF power. The expected electron temperature and plasma density behaviour were observed at a low gas flow rate. The electron temperature decreases with the RF power from 8089 K to 6097 K as demand for increasing the plasma density. An energy loss mechanism was revealed while raising the gas flow rate, as the electron temperature increases with RF power from 5750 K to 6221 K, and the plasma density decreases. This behaviour is due to the anomalous skin effect. Detecting and avoiding this phenomenon is essential as it negatively affects torch energy efficiency and waste treatment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".