MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410249195 · doi:10.1002/cjce.25746

Prediction of thermal conversion characteristics for co‐combustion of waste tire–lignite coal using machine learning algorithms

2025· article· en· W4410249195 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Combustion and Slurry Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoalCombustionWaste managementEnvironmental scienceThermalComputer scienceProcess engineeringCoal combustion productsOxy-fuelPetroleum engineeringAutomotive engineeringAlgorithmEngineeringChemistryMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Co‐combustion of coal with various waste resources is an effective energy recovery strategy that integrates waste‐derived fuels while reducing dependence on fossil fuels. In this study, machine learning algorithms were used to predict thermogravimetric data for the co‐combustion process of waste tire (WT) and lignite coal (LC) blends to improve the understanding of the thermal conversion characteristics. The study analyzed the combustion behaviour of WT, LC, and their mixtures at four different heating rates (10, 20, 30, and 40°C/min) and various mixing ratios (100:0, 20:80, 40:60, 50:50, 60:40, 80:20, and 0:100) using thermogravimetry–derivative thermogravimetry/differential scanning calorimetry (TG‐DTG/DSC) techniques. To improve the prediction accuracy, eight machine learning algorithms—adaptive boosting regression, decision tree regression, k‐nearest neighbour regression, linear regression, multi‐layer perceptron, random forest regression, support vector machine regression, and XGBoost—were applied to model the co‐combustion process. The results showed a strong correlation between experimental data and machine learning predictions, confirming the effectiveness of these models. By enabling accurate real‐time prediction of thermal conversion characteristics, this study reduces the reliance on labour‐intensive thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and facilitates cost‐effective, adaptive, and scalable optimization of combustion processes for industrial applications.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.194 · 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