Aluminum Phosphates Derived from Alumina and Alumina‐Sol–Gel Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aluminum phosphate products formed by the reactions of alumina and alumina‐gel systems with acidic phosphates were analyzed. Drying of alumina‐gel to form microcrystalline boehmite and conversion to γ‐alumina by thermal treatment was indicated by the appearance of octahedral, pentacoordinate, or tetrahedral sites, which were established using 27 Al magic‐angle‐spinning solid‐state nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Crystalline aluminum phosphate products and amorphous material were identified using this technique. α‐alumina and heat‐treated alumina‐gel that were reacted with phosphate in an Al:P ratio of 1:1 yielded dramatically different aluminum orthophosphate:aluminum metaphosphate product ratios of 8.2:1 and 1:1.1, respectively. When alumina‐gel was heat‐treated with phosphate, an abundance of aluminum orthophosphate, aluminum metaphosphate, and hydrated aluminum phosphate products were affected by varying conditions of temperature and time of heat treatment and by the amount of phosphate present. An α‐alumina/alumina‐gel composite sol–gel phase that was reacted with phosphoric acid (H 3 PO 4 ) in a Al:P ratio of 1:1 exhibited an increased quantity of aluminum metaphosphate products compared with an α‐alumina:H 3 PO 4 ratio of 1:1 and a higher percentage of reaction (79%) compared with the reactions of an α‐alumina:H 3 PO 4 ratio of 1:1 or an alumina‐gel:H 3 PO 4 ratio of 1:1. The morphologies of aluminum triphosphate hydrate and aluminum metaphosphate product phases were observed using scanning electron microscopy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".