HZSM-5 Zeolites with Different SiO<sub>2</sub>/Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub>Ratios. Characterization and NH<sub>3</sub>Desorption Kinetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article reports the influence of the SiO 2 /Al 2 O 3 ratio (30, 80, and 280) on HZSM-5 zeolite properties. XRD patterns show a decrease in the XRD peak intensity at low 2θ angles for low SiO 2 /Al 2 O 3 ratio zeolites. N 2 adsorption and desorption isotherms display hysteresis with both micropores and mesopores likely contributing to the particles network. The NLDFT cylindrical model confirms the characteristic 5.5 Å micropores in the zeolite pore framework. Furthermore, specific surface area, pore volume, and pore size distributions demonstrate that changes in the SiO 2 /Al 2 O 3 ratio do not influence HZSM-5 structural properties. NH 3 -TPD shows both weak and strong acid sites. Pyridine-FTIR also confirms that, in HZSM-5, the weak acidity encompasses Lewis and hydrogen-bonded sites, while the strong acidity mainly involves the Brönsted acid sites. It is proven that the ratio of weak to strong acid sites as measured by NH 3 -TPD and Pyridine-FTIR displays similar changes to the SiO 2 /Al 2 O 3 ratio. Furthermore, NH 3 desorption kinetics and numerical regression allow the establishment of energies of activation for both strong and weak acid sites. It is also found that the kinetic desorption rate constants vary in agreement with the changes in weak and strong acid sites as observed with NH 3 -TPD and Pyridine-FTIR.
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) | 0.000 | 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".