Kinetic\nStudies of a Novel CO<sub>2</sub> Gasification\nMethod Using Coal from Deep Unmineable Seams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seven\ncoal samples taken from cores drilled in the Cretaceous Mannville\nGroup were used for investigation of coal properties and carbon dioxide\n(CO<sub>2</sub>) gasification. The depths of the cores ranged between\n700 and 800 m below the surface in the Western Canadian Sedimentary\nBasin. A new method was developed with an average heating rate of\n200 K/min using CO<sub>2</sub> as the gasifying agent from the experiment’s\nbeginning until its end. The coal properties of the seven coals from\nthese deep coal seams showed certain similarities and variations.\nThere is an obvious relationship between the reactivity and the material\nproperties determined in the study. In particular, the specific surface\narea calculated relative to the carbon content measured in the ultimate\nanalysis showed a correlation with the reactivity. The ash content\nand composition also appeared to influence char reactivity. The gasification\nbehaviors of the in situ coals were compared to those of two surface-mined\ncoals. The new method of coal gasification showed a significant difference\nto those that were heated up in an inert gas, such as nitrogen, to\nthe target temperature. A maximum rate of reaction did not exist when\nthe new method was used, and the integrated core model gave better\nresults than the commonly used random pore model in terms of kinetic\nmodeling.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.008 | 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".