MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121121947 · doi:10.1139/v03-024

Aqueous-gas phase partitioning and hydrolysis of organic iodides

2003· article· en· W2121121947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Glenn A. Glowa, J. Clara Wren

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryVolatility (finance)HydrolysisPartition coefficientDecompositionIodineIodideAqueous solutionAqueous two-phase systemOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The volatility and decomposition of organic iodides in a reactor containment building are important parameters to consider when assessing the potential consequences of a nuclear reactor accident. However, there are few experimental data available for the volatilities (often reported as partition coefficients) or few rate constants regarding the decomposition (via hydrolysis) of organic iodides. The partition coefficients and hydrolysis rate constants of eight organic iodides, having a range of molecular structures, have been measured in the current studies. This data, and data accumulated in the literature, have been reviewed and discussed to provide guidelines for appropriate organization of organic iodides for the purpose of modelling iodine behaviour under postulated nuclear reactor accident conditions. After assessment of the partition coefficients and their temperature dependences of many classes of organic compounds, it was found that organic iodides could be divided into two categories based upon their volatility relative to molecular iodine. Similarly, hydrolysis rates and their temperature dependences are assigned to the two categories of organic iodides.Key words: organic iodide, hydrolysis, partition coefficient, iodine behaviour model, nuclear reactor safety.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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)0.0040.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207