MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1579573739 · doi:10.1002/9783527628698.hgc037

Expanded Liquid Phases in Catalysis: Gas‐expanded Liquids and Liquid–Supercritical Fluid Biphasic Systems

2010· other· en· W1579573739 on OpenAlexaff
Ulrich Hintermair, Walter Leitner, Philip G. Jessop

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicIonic liquids properties and applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIonic liquidSupercritical fluidCatalysisMiscibilityChemical engineeringSolubilityChemistryReagentDissolutionSolventPolymerizationOrganic chemistryEmulsionMaterials sciencePolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The sections in this article are A Practical Classification of Biphasic Systems Consisting of Liquids and Compressed Gases for Multiphase Catalysis Physical Properties of Expanded Liquid Phases Volumetric Expansion Density Viscosity Melting Point Interfacial Tension Diffusivity Polarity Gas Solubility Chemisorption of Gases in Liquids and their Use for Synthesis and Catalysis In SituGeneration of Acids and Temporary Protection Strategies Switchable Solvents and Catalyst Systems Using Gas‐expanded Liquids for Catalysis Motivation and Potential Benefits Sequential Reaction–Separation Processes Tunable Precipitation and Crystallization Tunable Phase Separations Tunable Miscibility Hydrogenation Reactions Carbonylation Reactions Oxidation Reactions Miscellaneous Why Perform Liquid–SCFBiphasic Reactions? By Necessity (Unintentional Immiscibility) To Facilitate Post‐Reaction Separation To Facilitate Product/Catalyst Separation in Continuous Flow Systems To Stabilize a Catalyst To Remove a Kinetic Product To Control the Concentration of Reagent or Product in the Reacting Phase To Permit Emulsion Polymerization To Create Templated Materials Biphasic Liquid–SCFSystems Solvent Selection Aqueous–SCFBiphasic Systems Ionic Liquid–SCFBiphasic Systems Polymer–SCFBiphasic Systems Liquid Product–SCFBiphasic Systems Biphasic Reactions in Emulsions Water‐in‐SCFInverse Emulsions SCF‐in‐Water Emulsions Ionic Liquid‐in‐SCFEmulsions Applications of Emulsions

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIonic liquids properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207