Effect of the additive concentration on the modification of petroleum coke and anode quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Calcined petroleum coke is one of the major raw materials for anode manufacturing, which is used as the carbon source in electrolytic cells for primary aluminium production. It constitutes around 65%–70% of the anode recipe. Therefore, the quality of calcined coke has an important impact on anode quality, which affects the cost, energy efficiency, carbon consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. Another main raw material for anode production is coal tar pitch. To enhance the anode quality, the interaction between these two components should be improved. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of coke surface modification, and the amount of additive used on anode quality. An additive at different percentages was used to modify two different cokes. Aromatics and heteroatom‐containing functional groups of non‐modified and modified cokes were identified by FT‐IR and compared to see the effect of the additive concentration on anode quality. Wettability experiments were carried out using the sessile‐drop method since the wettability of coke by pitch and the anode quality are closely related. Anodes were produced and characterized using non‐modified and modified cokes. It was found that the amount of additive used must be adjusted to improve the anode quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".