MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102653353 · doi:10.1002/jssc.201000032

Preparing titania aerogel monolithic chromatography columns using supercritical carbon dioxide

2010· article· en· W2102653353 on OpenAlexaff
Ruohong Sui, Suya Liu, Gilles Lajoie, Paul A. Charpentier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Separation Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMesoporous Materials and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonolithAerogelMaterials scienceSupercritical fluidSupercritical carbon dioxideAnataseCalcinationBiomoleculeChemical engineeringPolymerSol-gelTitanium dioxideParticle (ecology)Supercritical dryingNanotechnologyPhotocatalysisChemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The search for a method to fabricate monolithic inorganic columns has attracted significant recent attention due to their unique ability in separation applications of various biomolecules. Silica and polymer based monolithic columns have been prepared, but titania and other metal oxide monoliths have been elusive, primarily due to their fragility. This article describes a new approach for preparing nanostructured titania based columns, which offer better performance over conventional particle packed columns for separating a wide variety of biomolecules including phosphopeptides. TiO(2) monolithic aerogels were synthesized in separation columns using in situ sol-gel reactions in supercritical carbon dioxide (scCO(2)) followed by calcination, and compared to those prepared in heptanes. The characterization results show that scCO(2) is a better solvent for the sol-gel reactions, providing lower shrinkage with the anatase TiO(2) monolith composed of nanofibers with very high surface areas. The monolithic columns show the ability to isolate phosphopeptides with little flow resistance compared to conventional titania particle based microcolumns.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Separation ScienceSame topicMesoporous Materials and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207