Alkaline–acid modification of <scp>HZSM</scp> ‐5 zeolites: Catalytic conversion of methanol in synergy with raffinate oil to light olefins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract HZSM‐5 zeolites were treated by alkaline and alkaline–acid composite modification via the hydrothermal method. A comprehensive series of characterization techniques, including X‐ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), N 2 adsorption–desorption, temperature‐programmed desorption of ammonia (NH 3 ‐TPD), and pyridine adsorption infrared spectroscopy (Py‐IR), were employed to investigate the physicochemical properties of the ZSM‐5 zeolites before and after modification. The results demonstrated that the relative crystallinity of the modified zeolites remained nearly intact, with the MFI structure being well‐preserved. Nevertheless, the total acid content of both modified samples decreased, accompanied by an increase in specific surface area and pore size. Notably, the zeolites treated with alkaline–acid composite modification showed a slight elevation in the total L‐acid content. When applied to the reaction of coupling methanol with raffinate oil for the production of light olefins, compared with the unmodified ZSM‐5 zeolite, the modified ZSM‐5 zeolites showed a significant increase in the selectivity and yield of triene. In particular, the ZSM‐5 zeolite A2 modified by the alkali–acid composite method exhibited remarkable enhancements in catalytic activity and stability. Its methanol conversion rate exceeded 99%, and when the selectivity for triene reached 60.26%, the yield reached a high value of 36.8%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".