MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043747819 · doi:10.1002/jctb.652

Extraction separation of Ir(III) and Rh(III) with Cyanex 923 from chloride media: a possible recovery from spent autocatalysts

2002· article· en· W2043747819 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Devendra V. Chavan, Purushottam Dhadke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndustry Canada
KeywordsChemistryHydrochloric acidExtraction (chemistry)TolueneStoichiometryMetal ions in aqueous solutionChlorideAqueous solutionNuclear chemistryMetalAqueous two-phase systemInorganic chemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Liquid–liquid extraction of Ir(III) and Rh(III) with Cyanex 923 from aqueous hydrochloric acid media has been studied. Quantitative extraction of Ir(III) was observed in the range of 5.0–8.0 mol dm−3 HCl with 0.1 mol dm−3 Cyanex 923, while Rh(III) was extracted quantitatively in the range of 1.0–2.0 mol dm−3 HCl with 0.05 mol dm−3 Cyanex 923 in toluene along with 0.2 mol dm−3 SnCl2. The Ir(III) was back extracted with 4.0 mol dm−3 HNO3 quantitatively from the organic phase while Rh(III) was stripped with 3.0 mol dm−3 HNO3. The extraction of Rh(III) with Cyanex 923 was not quantitative without use of SnCl2. However in the extraction of Ir(III) a negative trend was observed in the presence of SnCl2. Varying the temperature of extraction showed that the extraction reactions of both the metal ions are exothermic in nature, and the stoichiometric ratio of Ir(III)/Rh(III) to Cyanex 923 in organic phase was found to be 1:3. The methods developed were applied to the recovery of these metal ions from a synthetic solution of similar composition to that from leaching of spent autocatalysts in 6.0 mol dm−3 HCl. © 2002 Society of Chemical Industry

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Technology & BiotechnologySame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207