MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407846847 · doi:10.1093/ijlct/ctae295

Multi-objective optimization evaluation of renewable and clean methanol synthesis

2025· article· en· W4407846847 on OpenAlexaff
Tao Hai, Rassol Hamed Rasheed, Aman Sharma, Aashim Dhawan, Prabhat Kumar Sharma, Husam Rajab, Nidhal Becheikh, Walid Aich, Lioua Kolsi, Narinderjit Singh Sawaran Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Low-Carbon Technologies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersNorthern Border UniversityGuizhou Science and Technology Department
KeywordsRenewable energyMethanolClean energyBiochemical engineeringProcess engineeringChemistryEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental engineeringOrganic chemistryElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study examines the feasibility of establishing a power-to-fuel facility for synthesizing renewable methanol (e-methanol) through the integration of green hydrogen and captured carbon dioxide. Hydrogen is produced via water electrolysis using surplus renewable electricity, while carbon dioxide is captured from a conventional power plant’s emissions through an amine-based absorption process. Despite the current economic constraints, with production costs exceeding current market prices for methanol, the study highlights potential future competitiveness, especially considering impending European regulatory frameworks. Furthermore, the study employs a hybrid Grey Wolf Optimizer–Particle Swarm Optimization approach to balance the trade-offs between methanol production cost and energy efficiency.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Low-Carbon TechnologiesSame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207