MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386604607 · doi:10.1007/s00723-023-01607-x

Quantifying Liquid-Solid Mass Transfer in a Trickle Bed Using $${T}_{2}-{T}_{2}$$ Relaxation Exchange NMR

2023· article· en· W4386604607 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Scott V. Elgersma, Qingyuan Zheng, Nikolaos Avrantinis, Andrew J. Sederman, Michael D. Mantle, Lynn F. Gladden

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Magnetic Resonance · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaShell Global Solutions InternationalShell
KeywordsMass transferAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Measurement of the liquid-solid mass transfer coefficient within a trickle bed (i.e. gas-liquid flow within a packed bed) of porous silica pellets is achieved through the use of $${T}_{2}-{T}_{2}$$ T 2 - T 2 relaxation exchange nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Compared to many conventional measurement techniques, the NMR method enables measurement of mass transport using pellets of real commercial interest. Mass transfer coefficients measured using the NMR technique over a range of liquid Reynolds number, 0.2 $$\le R{e}_{\mathrm{L}}\le $$ ≤ R e L ≤ 1.4, are compared to a number of literature correlations, with values measured using the NMR method falling within the range predicted by the correlations. The results demonstrate the importance of considering both the flow conditions and the type of pellets used to develop mass transport correlations in trickle beds. This novel NMR application may be utilized in the future to screen catalyst pellets in trickle beds for optimal mass transport properties.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Magnetic ResonanceSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207