MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409742647 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25730

A hydrometallurgical process for the separation of lead and bismuth from lead bismuthite

2025· article· en· W4409742647 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Artem Daminov, Yurii Yukhin, O. A. Logutenkо, Olesya Sheina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation
KeywordsLead (geology)BismuthSeparation (statistics)Process (computing)MetallurgyMaterials scienceComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A hydrometallurgical process to efficiently separate and recover bismuth and lead from lead bismuthite was proposed. It included the dissolution of lead bismuthite in a solution containing 4.2 mol/L HNO 3 and 5.0 wt.% of carbamide at a temperature of 70–90°C followed by bismuth precipitation by adding lead carbonate to precipitate basic bismuth nitrate [Bi 6 O 4 (OH) 4 ](NO 3 ) 6 ∙ H 2 O of a technical grade. The lead‐containing solution was further evaporated to produce lead nitrate Pb(NO 3 ) 2 of a chemically pure grade, while the basic bismuth nitrate was further purified from metal impurities. Basic bismuth nitrate was dissolved in a ~6.0 mol/L HNO 3 solution at a temperature of 60–70°C, diluted with distilled water two times, and mixed with an aqueous ammonium carbonate solution to adjust the pH to 0.9 at a temperature of 55°C and to precipitate bismuth. After washing and drying of the precipitate at a temperature of 90–100°C, the high purity basic bismuth nitrate [Bi 6 O 5 (OH) 3 ](NO 3 ) 5 ∙ 3H 2 O was obtained. The large‐scale laboratory trials confirmed the relevance of the proposed technology for hydrometallurgical processing of lead‐ and bismuth‐containing raw materials. It is an easy and economical way to produce high purity bismuth and lead compounds.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207