MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982346010 · doi:10.1021/ie070758s

Modeling of the Gas−Antisolvent (GAS) Process for Crystallization of Beclomethasone Dipropionate Using Carbon Dioxide

2007· article· en· W1982346010 on OpenAlexaff
Shawn Dodds, Jeffery A. Wood, Paul A. Charpentier

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhase Equilibria and Thermodynamics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryNucleationCrystallizationThermodynamicsCarbon dioxideOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this work was to develop a mathematical model to describe the crystal size distributions (CSDs) produced from the gas−antisolvent (GAS) technique on the crystallization of beclomethasone-17,21-dipropionate (BDP), which is an anti-inflammatory corticosteroid commonly used to treat asthma. The solvent used was acetone, and the antisolvent was carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). The GAS technique was chosen for its ability to produce micrometer-sized particles of uniform size. A better understanding of how the GAS process affects the CSDs of BDP is desirable to optimize the GAS experimental conditions for the production of inhalable powders for next-generation dry-powder portable inhalers (DPIs). To describe the pressurization during the GAS process, a mass balance and a phase equilibrium model were required. A predictive relative partial molar volume fraction (RPMVF) equilibrium model was used in the absence of existing phase data for the BDP−acetone−CO 2 system. This model uses the binary two-phase solvent/CO 2 phase equilibrium, and then relates it to the solid concentration. The model was tested successfully with the phenanthrene−toluene−CO 2 model system, the naphthalene−toluene−CO 2 model system, and the more complex cholesterol−acetone−CO 2 model system before being used to predict the BDP−acetone−CO 2 system. A population balance was then used to model experimentally determined particle size distributions. Two models for secondary nucleation were used independently: (i) an empirical equation that is commonly used to model secondary nucleation, and (ii) a theory-based equation. The crystallization model was able to give good estimates of the cumulative volume (mass)-weighted size distributions metrics d p (10%), d p (50%), and d p (90%) of the experimental CSDs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

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

Citations28
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial & Engineering Chemistry ResearchSame topicPhase Equilibria and ThermodynamicsFrench-language works237,207