MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977470456 · doi:10.1021/ma048908n

Theoretical Study of the Copolymerization of Ethylene and Propylene by a Heterogeneous Ziegler−Natta Catalyst

2004· article· en· W1977470456 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Seth, Tom Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopolymerEthylenePolymer chemistryPolymerSteric effectsEthylene propylene rubberCatalysisMonomerChemistryZiegler–Natta catalystPolymerizationMaterials scienceOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The copolymerization of ethylene and propylene by a heterogeneous Ti/MgCl 2 Ziegler−Natta catalyst is studied with density functional theory calculations. One particular model of an active site, the so-called “TiCl 3 -based slope site”, is looked at in detail. The influence of the previous monomer insertion is allowed for by examining sites where the growing polymer chain is modeled by a methyl, propyl, isobutyl, and 2-butyl group. Propylene is found to form a more stable π-complex with the active site than ethylene. Propylene is also found to have a lower barrier to insertion into the Ti−C bond than ethylene in most instances and to prefer to insert in a 1−2 orientation rather than a 2−1 orientation. The relative height of the insertion barriers of ethylene and propylene is in contradiction to experimentally observed copolymer compositions. Increasing steric bulk of the polymer chain disfavors propylene insertion relative to ethylene insertion and 1−2 propylene insertion relative to 2−1 insertion. Some of the insertion reactions examined are shown to be significantly stereoselective due to the interaction of propylene and the growing polymer chain. Despite these stereoselective reactions, the active site modeled here will not produce tactic polymer except under some special circumstances which are outlined.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacromoleculesSame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207