MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083636253 · doi:10.1139/v02-146

Thermal oscillations in the bromate oxalic acid MnSO<sub>4</sub> H<sub>2</sub>SO<sub>4</sub> acetone system: A calorimetric study

2002· article· en· W2083636253 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sudeshna Biswas, Kallol Mukherjee, Dulal C. Mukherjee, Satya P. Moulik

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern Formation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of CalcuttaJadavpur University
KeywordsChemistryOxalic acidPotassium bromateAcetoneBromateInorganic chemistryCalorimetryDimethylformamidePotassiumTetrahydrofuranReaction calorimeterSolventOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oscillatory reaction of potassium bromate, oxalic acid, and MnSO4 in the presence of acetone in aq H2SO4 solutions has been studied calorimetrically at different concentrations of substrates. Acetone and oxalic acid have been found to accelerate the reaction by increasing the oscillation frequency. On the other hand, MnSO4 has a retarding effect; the frequency of oscillation decreases systematically with increasing concentration of MnSO4. Potassium bromate shows mixed behavior in this respect. The total heat evolved during the reaction per mol of oxalic acid consumed has been evaluated, which can be used to calculate the concentrations of the various reactants at different stages of the reaction. The effects of different electrolytes (KCl, NaCl, BaCl2, CaCl2, SrCl2, NaBr, NaI, KNO3, NaNO3, and Ca(NO3)2) and solvents (dimethylformamide, 1,4-dioxane, acetonitrile, and tetrahydrofuran) on the extents of oscillation and the enthalpy change for the process have been also examined.Key words: Belousov–Zhabotinsky reaction, oscillatory reaction, oxalic acid, calorimetry, acetone.

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)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern FormationFrench-language works237,207