Determination of the fractal dimension of alumina using adsorption: Challenges of choosing appropriate adsorbates and analysis methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The classical method for surface characterisation of the porous structure of the catalysts is nitrogen (N 2 ) adsorption at −196°C, which provides a catalyst surface area value valid for molecules similar in size to N 2 (0.162 nm 2 /molecule). To complement and obtain more information about the materials, catalyst surfaces can be characterised using fractal geometry. The fractal dimension of a sample can be determined by the adsorption uptake of molecules of different sizes on the surface of interest in order to obtain a characteristic parameter of the surface geometry known as the fractal dimension, D . In this work, the value of D for a γ‐alumina catalyst support has been determined ( D = 2.71 ± 0.15) using different adsorbates (argon, nitrogen, isopropanol, pyridine, and n ‐butane). The decision process for choosing these adsorbates and the challenges of this type of characterisation method are discussed in this article. © 2011 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".