MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044305009 · doi:10.1063/1.1637335

Enhancements in dissociative electron attachment to CF4, chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons adsorbed on H2O ice

2004· article· en· W2044305009 on OpenAlexafffund
Qing‐Bin Lu, Léon Sanche

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDissociation (chemistry)ChemistrySolvated electronElectronFragmentation (computing)Electron captureAdsorptionElectron ionizationAtomic physicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Physical chemistryRadiolysisIonizationIonPhysicsEnvironmental chemistryAqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report that the absolute cross sections for dissociative attachment of approximately 0 eV electrons to chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are strongly enhanced by the presence of H2O ice. The absolute cross sections for CFCl3, CHF2Cl, and CH3CF2Cl on water ice are measured to be approximately 8.9 x 10(-14), approximately 5.1 x 10(-15), and approximately 4.9 x 10(-15) cm2 at approximately 0 eV, respectively. The former value is about 1 order of magnitude higher than that in the gas phase, while the latter two are 3-4 orders higher. In contrast, the resonances at electron energies > or = 2.0 eV are strongly suppressed either for CFCs and HCFCs or for CF4 adsorbed on H2O ice. The cross-section enhancement is interpreted to be due to electron transfer from precursor states of the solvated electron in ice to an unfilled molecular orbital of CFCs or HCFCs followed by its dissociation. This study indicates that electron-induced dissociation is a significant process leading to CFC and HCFC fragmentation on ice surfaces.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations41
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207