MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104585185 · doi:10.1039/c0gc00205d

Solubility of bio-sourced feedstocks in ‘green’ solvents

2010· article· en· W2104585185 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGreen Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCatalysis for Biomass Conversion
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistrySolubilityLevulinic acidSuccinic acidDissolutionOrganic chemistrySorbitolFumaric acidXylitolTartaric acidXyloseIonic liquidMalic acidCitric acidFermentationCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A group of 14 different bio-sourced, renewable feedstocks (homoserine, 1; glutamic acid, 2; aspartic acid, 3; 2,5-furandicarboxylic acid, 4; fumaric acid, 5; oxalacetic acid, 6; tartaric acid, 7; malic acid, 8; succinic acid, 9; levulinic acid, 10; γ-hydroxybutyrolactone, 11; xylitol, 12; mannitol, 13; sorbitol, 14) have been examined for their solubility/miscibility in a variety of ‘green’ solvents, including water, supercritical carbon dioxide (scCO2), and ionic liquids. Two other bio-based compounds 5-hydroxymethylfurfural, 15, and D-xylose, 16, were studied in selected solvents. Trends in solubility have been assessed so that these data may be extrapolated to help predict solubilities of other related compounds. For example, 10, 11 and 15 all demonstrated appreciable solubility in scCO2, as they possess weak intermolecular interactions. The dicarboxylic acids studied (4–9) all proved soluble in modified scCO2 (by use of MeOH as a cosolvent). While the polyols (12–14) and 1 were insoluble in scCO2 but water of various pHs and ionic liquids proved adept at their dissolution. Some of the amino acids studied (2 and 3) were only soluble in water with an adjustment of pH.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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