MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055626988 · doi:10.2495/cmem070841

Evaluation of phenolic resins from one-pot microwave synthesis

2007· article· en· W2055626988 on OpenAlexafffund
A.Z. Britten, Malcolm M. MacIntyre, Adango Miadonye

Bibliographic record

VenueWIT transactions on modelling and simulation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMicrowave-Assisted Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversities Space Research AssociationCape Breton University
KeywordsPhenolOxalic acidMelting pointMicrowavePhenolsNuclear chemistryCatalysisChemistryShellacMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The characteristics of oxalic acid catalyzed phenolic resins, synthesized using the conventional heating method and by a one-pot microwave process, were evaluated and compared. Phenolic resins were produced in an autoclave with reflux times of 3, 5 and 7 hours, and by one-pot microwave synthesis at different power levels (176.364, 315.092, 453.820, 592.548W) for reaction times of 15-90 minutes. UV-vis spectroscopy and FT-IR analyses showed similarities in the characteristics of the resins synthesized by both methods. Concentration of residual phenol in the products decreased with reaction time. For the conventional method the decrease in phenol after an initial 3hrs of reaction were 4.3% (in 5hrs) and 22.3% (7hrs), while in microwave synthesis at a power level of 176.364W and an initial reaction time of 30mins the phenol decreased by 33.05% (in 60mins) and 91.61% (in 90mins). At a power level of 315.092W and an reaction time of 15mins it decreased by 36.3% (in 20mins), 16.5% (in 25mins) and 10.8% (in 30mins).

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWIT transactions on modelling and simulationSame topicMicrowave-Assisted Synthesis and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207