Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 474

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes

Kuramochi, Takeshi, Ramírez, Andrea, Turkenburg, Wim, Faaij, André·2012·Progress in Energy and Combustion Science

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 474

Metadata

Authors
Kuramochi, T., Ramírez, A., Turkenburg, W., & Faaij, A.
Venue
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-02
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
87-112
ISSN
0360-1285 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2097685362
Cited by
474
References
0
FWCI
40.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001
The paper
Kuramochi, T., Ramírez, A., Turkenburg, W., & Faaij, A. (2012). Comparative assessment of CO2 capture technologies for carbon-intensive industrial processes. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2011.05.001

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.