MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086636771 · doi:10.1021/jp9061253

A Low Temperature Study of the Reactions of Atomic Chlorine with Simple Alkanes

2009· article· en· W2086636771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin M. Hickson, Astrid Bergeat, Michel Costes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropaneChemistryArrhenius equationReaction rate constantAtmospheric temperature rangeAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChlorineResonance fluorescenceMoleculeKineticsPhysical chemistryThermodynamicsFluorescenceActivation energyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The kinetics of the reactions of atomic chlorine with ethane and propane have been studied in a continuous supersonic flow reactor over the range 48 K < or = T < or = 167 K. Chlorine atoms were produced by microwave discharge upstream of the Laval nozzle and were probed in the vacuum ultraviolet wavelength range around 138 nm by resonance fluorescence. The reaction of Cl with ethane has been found to exhibit a positive temperature dependence, with a rate coefficient decreasing from (4.3 +/- 0.6) x 10(-11) cm(3) molecule(-1) s(-1) at 167 K to (2.9 +/- 0.3) x 10(-11) cm(3) molecule(-1) s(-1) at 48 K and deviates from true Arrhenius behavior below 120 K. In contrast, the rate coefficient for the reaction of Cl with propane has been found to have a constant value of (1.4 +/- 0.2) x 10(-10) cm(3) molecule(-1) s(-1) over the same temperature range. The expressed uncertainties are the combined statistical (a single standard deviation from the mean) and systematic (estimated at 10%) uncertainties.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207