MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using Hg2+ as a Precursor to Calibrate Gaseous Elemental Mercury from Pyrolysis of Coal

2017· article· en· W6924782299 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)CoalPyrolysisCalibrationAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Elemental mercuryReproducibility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mercury is easily volatile and vaporizes in air. The monitor of mercury in gas phase provides insight for developing advanced Hg control technologies. However, the analytical method of gas mercury is rudimentary. In order to determine the gas mercury content, a reliable calibration method is needed. This study provides a method of calibrating gas mercury from pyrolysis of coal with Hg2+ as a precursor. The method is based on the principle that Hg2+ in aqueous solution can be quantitatively reduced by reductant into elemental mercury vapor to determine the calibration of mercury content in gas phase. Compared with the conventional calibration method based on the saturated vapor principle, this method eliminates the influence of the sampling temperature, the quantity of mercury during sampling can be easily controlled, and pollution of the gaseous mercury stored in the laboratory is avoided. To illustrate the accuracy of the calibration method, the quantity of elemental mercury emission during pyrolysis of four coals were determined. Results show that the method has good reproducibility and adaptability. Compared with the Canadian Ontario-Hydro method, the relative standard deviations of both methods are less than 3.0%, indicating a high reliability of this calibration method.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.000

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 head0.491
GPT teacher head0.668
Teacher spread0.177 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicMaternal and Neonatal HealthcareFrench-language works237,207