Oxidation of naphthalene in supercritical water up to 420°C and 30 MPA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reaction between naphthalene and oxygen in supercritical water (SCW; 374°C, 22.1 MPa) has been studied in a batch reactor of 6-ml volume placed in a fluidized bath. Reaction temperature varied from 300°C to 420°C, while pressure varied from 18 to 29.3 MPa. These conditions corresponded to both subcritical and supercritical water. Conversion of naphthalene in supercritical water reached about 99%; more than 80% of carbon appeared as CO 2 within 300 s reaction time. The effect of time and O 2 concentration on CO 2 yield was determined. Intermediate species formed during naphthalene oxidation in SCW were identified and quantified for the first time. They included acetic acid, ketone, and carboxyl compounds. Two main products observed in the aqueous phase were acetic acid and formic acid. Naphthoquinone, salicylaldehyde, 2′-hydroxyacetophenone, salicylic acid, phthalic anhydride, phthalide, chromone, 1,4-naphthoquinone, 1-naphthol, dibenzofuran, and fluorenone were identified during the SCW oxidation of naphthalene at 343°C and 212 MPa. Type and amount of intermediates varied with temperature and pressure. The following sequence of reactions was proposed for SCW oxidation of naphthalene: (1) breaking off the benzene ring; (2) formation of light hydrocarbons such as formic acid, acetic acid, aromatic carboxylicacid, ketone, and ester with one benzene ring; (3) polymerization of selected intermediates forming dibenzofuran, fluorenone, and 2′-hydroxyacetophenone; and (4) oxidation of intermediates to CO 2 and H 2 O. Possible reaction of naphthalene oxidation via free radicals is also discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".