MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411194816 · doi:10.1038/s41545-025-00484-0

A review of fundamentals, challenges, prospects, and emerging trends in hydrate-based desalination

2025· review· en· W4411194816 on OpenAlexafffund
Rouhollah Jalili, Γεώργιος Κολλιόπουλος

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Clean Water · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDesalinationNexus (standard)SustainabilityHydrateProcess engineeringEnvironmental scienceProcess (computing)Biochemical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydrate-based desalination (HBD) has emerged as a promising technology among conventional desalination methods due to its low energy consumption, wide operating window with regards to total dissolved solids (TDS), and efficient water recovery. This paper provides an in-depth review of the fundamental properties of hydrates, including thermodynamic and kinetic aspects of their formation. Then, it delves into recent advancements in thermodynamic and kinetic hydrate promoters that aim to address HBD's main challenge, which is the slow hydrate formation process. Subsequently, the review systematically examines environmental and toxicity concerns associated with chemicals used in HBD, addressing the growing demand for sustainable and biodegradable desalination solutions. Finally, a comparative analysis between HBD and conventional methods highlights its potential as an energy-efficient and selective desalination process poised to enhance sustainability within the water-energy-environment nexus.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Clean WaterSame topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207