MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392091227 · doi:10.1080/15435075.2024.2317420

Catalytic hydrothermal liquefaction of Camelina sativa residues for renewable biogasoline production

2024· article· en· W4392091227 on OpenAlexafffund
Abayomi Akande, Mohanned Mohamedali, Gullapelli Sadanandam, Olumide Bolarinwa Ayodele, Raphael Idem, Hussameldin Ibrahim

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Green Energy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Regina
KeywordsHydrothermal liquefactionCatalysisCamelinaCamelina sativaChemistryBoiling pointDeoxygenationLiquefactionHydrocarbonRaw materialHydrodesulfurizationFreezing pointChemical engineeringOrganic chemistryAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Camelina sativa plant residue was used as feedstock for the production of biogasoline (a mixture of paraffinic and olefinic hydrocarbons) by catalytic hydrothermal liquefaction (cHTL) process. The experiments were conducted at temperature range 200–375°C and pressure range 10–19 MPa. Molecular hydrogen was added for the hydro-deoxygenation processes. Various experiments were performed to understand the contributions of process parameters such as temperature, pressure, hydrogen, and retention time on reaction conversion and products distribution. This was followed by screening of different catalyst supports – γ-Al2O3, HZSM-5, SiO2-Al2O3, SBA-15, and Al2O3-HZSM-5 to understand their impacts as well as catalytic activities. The Al2O3/HZSM-5 exhibited the best properties and was impregnated with a varying range of cobalt metal for the HTL of Camelina sativa. The 5%Co/γ-Al2O3-HZSM-5 catalyst exhibited highest liquefaction conversion (79%) and biogasoline yield (43%) at optimized reaction conditions due to the presence of strong brønsted acidity on the catalyst were that enhanced both the hydrocarbon cracking and hydrogenation leading to the production of low boiling point and low molecular weight hydrocarbon within the boiling point range of fossil gasoline. Across all the data point used in the work, the average deviation was within ± 3%, these are mostly indicated by the error bars.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Green EnergySame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207