MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416091504 · doi:10.1016/j.cattod.2025.115631

Effect of alkali promotion on the catalytic performance of the synergetic K/Fe3O4-Fe5C2/Al2O3 catalyst for CO2 hydrogenation to light paraffins and olefines

2025· article· en· W4416091504 on OpenAlexafffund
Yasaman Ghaffari, Anik Ashirwadam, Ali Izadbakhsh, David S. A. Simakov

Bibliographic record

VenueCatalysis Today · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicCatalysts for Methane Reforming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsCatalysisYield (engineering)Alkali metalSelectivitySpace velocityPotassium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A series of K/α-Fe 2 O 3 /γ-Al 2 O 3 catalysts with high specific surface area (150–300 m 2 /g) and various levels of alkali promotion (0–11 wt% K) were synthesized using the reverse microemulsion method. The capacity of the catalysts to transform CO 2 into light olefins and paraffins via direct hydrogenation at moderate pressures was examined. The effect of potassium loading was investigated in the 300–500 °C range at 11 bar, evaluating catalytic performance in terms of CO 2 conversion, C2+ selectivity, and space time yield (STY). Reaction tests showed that 7.8 wt% K loading provides the highest CO 2 conversion and C2+ selectivity, of 45 % and 46 %, respectively, with a space time yield of 6.5 mmol g −1 h −1 at 11 bar and 400 °C. The catalyst without alkali promotion provided only 24 % CO 2 conversion, 12 % C2 + selectivity, and a space time yield of 0.87 mmol g −1 h −1 . Under reaction conditions α-Fe 2 O 3 was converted to a mixture of Fe 3 O 4 and χ-Fe 5 C 2 nanoparticles that act synergistically to reduce and hydrogenate CO 2 . Alkali promotion notably enhanced the formation of χ-Fe 5 C 2 , leading to higher selectivity to C2 + hydrocarbons.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatalysis TodaySame topicCatalysts for Methane ReformingFrench-language works237,207