MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402720985 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25481

<scp>CrMn</scp> ‐based catalysts for oxidative dehydrogenation of propane to propylene with <scp> CO <sub>2</sub> </scp>

2024· article· en· W4402720985 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Armin Moniri, Sandeep Badoga, Mohamed Kamal Ahmed Ali, Jinwen Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysis and Oxidation Reactions
Canadian institutionsDevon Energy (Canada)Natural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsDehydrogenationPropaneCatalysisOxidative phosphorylationChemistryChemical engineeringCombinatorial chemistryOrganic chemistryBiochemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The paper investigates the catalytic oxidative dehydrogenation of propane with carbon dioxide (ODH‐CO 2 ) as a promising route for propylene production, an avenue yet to be commercially developed. Utilizing the incipient wetness catalyst preparation method, CrMn catalysts were synthesized on three supports (γ‐Al 2 O 3 , ZSM‐5, and SBA‐15). Comprehensive characterization through Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) analysis, X‐ray diffraction (XRD), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), transmission electron microscopy (TEM)/scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM)‐energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS), and hydrogen temperature programmed reduction (H 2 ‐TPR) was conducted to comprehend catalyst behaviour. Among the six catalysts tested, Cr/SBA‐15 was exhibited as the best performer, achieving propane and CO 2 conversions of 36.2% and 14.1%, respectively, with a propylene selectivity of 33.4%. Over a 50‐h time on stream (TOS), it demonstrated gradual declines in conversions while retaining 75% of initial values. The incorporation of manganese as a promoter effectively mitigated coke formation, albeit with slight reductions in propane conversion and propylene selectivity.

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)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.776

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCatalysis and Oxidation ReactionsFrench-language works237,207