MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404632120 · doi:10.1021/acsami.4c13247

Production of Carbon Fibers Using a Molten Cu–In Catalyst for Methane Pyrolysis

2024· article· en· W4404632120 on OpenAlexafffund
Genpei Cai, Natascha Miederhoff, Sawyer d’Entremont, Karsten Feigl, Markus Pfeiffer, D. Chester Upham

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFiber-reinforced polymer composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundPacific Institute for Climate Solutions
KeywordsMaterials sciencePyrolysisMethaneCatalysisCarbon fibersChemical engineeringOrganic chemistryComposite materialComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molten metal catalysts for methane pyrolysis and dry reforming are becoming recognized for their potential in decarbonization efforts. Their use in bubble column reactors facilitates continuous operation by allowing the produced carbon to float to the surface for removal. While most reported molten metals produce low-value amorphous carbon or graphitic sheets containing some metals, our study introduces a Cu-In alloy that selectively produces high-purity carbon nanofibers. These nanofibers are tubular and have a smooth or bamboo-like segmented structure with a diameter of approximately 100 nm. We have identified a droplet-based pathway for the growth of these fibers and removal of the droplets, observed consistently across a bubble column reactor, a surface reactor, and both in the absence and presence of carbon dioxide for pyrolysis and dry reforming. The molten Cu-In system is shown to outperform other molten metal catalysts, producing fibers with a purity greater than 99.9% after heat treatment.

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 score0.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicFiber-reinforced polymer compositesFrench-language works237,207