MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994785186 · doi:10.1021/ja9942585

Temperature Dependence of Fusion and Fragmentation Kinetics of Triton X-100 Micelles

2000· article· en· W1994785186 on OpenAlexaff
Yahya Rharbi, Mei Li, Mitchell A. Winnik, Kenneth G. Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicField-Flow Fractionation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryKineticsMicelleFragmentation (computing)FusionTriton X-100Physical chemistryPulmonary surfactantBiochemistryAqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes micelle exchange kinetics as a function of temperature for a pyrene derivative 1, a triglyceride containing a pyrenebutyrate ester, solubilized in aqueous micelles of Triton X-100. The kinetics were followed by stopped-flow fluorescence time-scan measurements in which the disappearance of excimer over time was monitored. Two components of the exchange process could be separated: a first-order process with an activation energy of 110 kJ/mol, and a second process with an activation energy of 160 kJ/mol. Because the second-order process had a rate ( k 2 ≈ 1 × 10 6 M - 1 s - 1 ) at 24.6 °C that was nearly independent of the pyrene probe ( 1, 1-octylpyrene, 1-dodecylpyrene), the second-order process was assigned to a fusion-fragmentation mechanism, rather than a “sticky-collision” mechanism. The rates of the first-order process ( k 1 ≈ 12 s - 1 for 1 ) at 24.6 °C increased with decreasing size of the probe. This step was attributed to a fragmentation-growth mechanism in which the fragmentation rate is rate limiting. Exchange by this mechanism must involve fragmentation of a micelle containing two probe molecules to form two sub-micelles large enough to bear one of the probes.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations78
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicField-Flow Fractionation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207