MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410081411 · doi:10.3390/biomass5020026

Valorization of Algal Biomass to Biofuel: A Review

2025· review· en· W4410081411 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomass · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicAlgal biology and biofuel production
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)BiofuelEnvironmental scienceBioenergyAlgae fuelEcologyBiologyBiodiesel

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concerns about sustainable energy sources arise due to the non-renewable nature of petroleum. Escalating demand for fossil fuels and price inflation negatively impact the energy security and economy of a country. The generation and usage of biofuel could be suggested as a sustainable alternative to fossil fuels. Several studies have investigated the potential of using edible crops for biofuel production. However, the usage of algae as suitable feedstock is currently being promoted due to its ability to withstand adverse environmental conditions, capacity to generate more oil per area, and potential to mitigate energy crises and climate change with no detrimental impact on the environment and food supply. Furthermore, the biorefinery approach in algae-based biofuel production controls the economy of algal cultivation. Hence, this article critically reviews different cultivation systems of algae with critical parameters including harvesting methods, intended algae-based biofuels with relevant processing techniques, other applications of valorized algal biomass, merits and demerits, and limitations and challenges in algae-based biofuel production.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.291 · 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