MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398137857 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25307

A kinetics study of microwave pyrolysis of sewage sludge and corn stalk mixture

2024· article· en· W4398137857 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jushen Qu, Yang Liu, Jie Fu, Hejie Yu, Jianjun Dai, Xiaotao Bi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of China
KeywordsStalkPyrolysisKineticsSewage sludgePulp and paper industryChemistryMicrowaveSewageWaste managementEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringBiologyOrganic chemistryEngineeringHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fast pyrolysis of sewage sludge (SS), corn stalk (CS), and their mixture under both direct and indirect microwave heating was carried out in a prototype microwave thermogravimetric reactor at high heating rates, 179 and 203 K/min, respectively. It was found that the samples could be heated up rapidly by direct microwave heating, while there is a temperature lag of the sample to the heated reactor wall in indirect heating. The Flynn–Wall–Ozawa (FWO) and Kissinger–Akahira–Sunose (KAS) methods were used to analyze the thermogravimetric data of SS, CS, and their mixture under direct microwave heating. When the FWO method was used, the average activation energies of SS, CS, and their mixture were obtained as 6.0, 18.9, and 39.8 kJ/mol, respectively. When the KAS method was used, the average activation energies of CS and mixture were 12.6 and 31.6 kJ/mol, respectively. Those values are much lower than reported under conventional heating, and likely result from the interaction of microwave irradiation and the biomass samples. The reaction kinetics of directly microwave‐heated biomass pyrolysis from this study provide essential data for modelling, scaling, and designing the microwave‐assisted in‐situ catalytic pyrolysis reactors with mixed biomass and catalyst particles.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicThermochemical Biomass Conversion ProcessesFrench-language works237,207