MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402233050 · doi:10.1080/00084433.2024.2399462

Stepwise recovery of metal element from blast-furnace magnesium slag by hydrometallurgy

2024· article· en· W4402233050 on OpenAlexaff
Jianwei Tang, Nusrat Bibi, Yehao Liu, Shaowei You, Heng Yao, Yong Liu, Quanxian Hua, Boxiong Shen, Junxiang Ding, Nan Zhao, Pengfei Liu, Baoming Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Metallurgical Quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Henan Province
KeywordsHydrometallurgyMagnesiumBlast furnaceMetallurgyPyrometallurgySlag (welding)MetalGround granulated blast-furnace slagMaterials scienceCopperSmeltingCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A route for selective recovery of magnesium (Mg), iron (Fe), and silicon (Si) from blast-furnace magnesium slag was studied in this paper. The experimental results demonstrated that under favourable conditions, such as sulfuric acid concentrations of 6% weight in weight (w/w), solid-liquid ratio (S/L) of 1:30, temperatures of 80°C, and a time of 30 min, the leaching rates of Mg, Si, and Fe can be reached up to 85.86%, 63.80%, and 17.04%, respectively. Flocculation desilication was used to remove Si up to 85.7% from the filtrate, and amorphous SiO2 was obtained with a purity of 95.8%. A significant level of effectiveness has been achieved in utilising ammonia neutralisation to eliminate iron (Fe) from the filtrate, with an impressive removal rate of 99.73%. Finally, a filtrate with a high concentration of magnesium (Mg) was obtained.

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Metallurgical QuarterlySame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207