MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988622442 · doi:10.1002/kin.10093

Temperature‐dependent kinetic study for ozonolysis of selected tropospheric alkenes

2002· article· en· W1988622442 on OpenAlexaff
Elena V. Avzianova, Parisa A. Ariya

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemical Kinetics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryOzonolysisIsopreneAlkeneReaction rate constantArrhenius equationPentenePropeneOzoneDouble bondHeptenePhotochemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryKineticsActivation energyCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ozonolysis reactions of alkenes are suggested to play major roles in the chemistry of the troposphere. Rate constants for the gas‐phase reactions of O3 with a series of alkenes were determined using relative rate technique based on GC/FID measurements of alkene decays. Experiments were carried out in air over the temperature range of 278–353 K at an atmospheric pressure of 760 Torr. An excess of 1,3,5‐trimethylbenzene was used as a HO radical scavenger in all experiments. Arrhenius parameters were calculated for ozonolysis of 1‐butene, 1‐pentene, 1‐hexene, 1‐heptene, 2‐methyl‐1‐butene, isobutene, trans‐2‐butene, trans‐2‐pentene, cis‐2‐pentene, trans‐2‐hexene, cis‐2‐hexene, 3‐chloropropene, 1,1‐dichloroethene, and isoprene from temperature‐dependent studies of the rate constants. The rate constants obtained in this study are compared with previous literature data. A good linear correlation between the logarithms of the rate constants and calculated HOMO energies of selected alkenes is observed. However, no clear correlation could have been drawn for chlorinated substituted alkenes. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Chem Kinet 34: 678–684, 2002

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations69
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Chemical KineticsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207