MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121584502 · doi:10.1039/c4fd00013g

Quantitative in situ and real-time monitoring of mechanochemical reactions

2014· article· en· W2121584502 on OpenAlexaff
Iván Halász, Tomislav Friščić, Simon A. J. Kimber, Krunoslav Užarević, Andreas Puškarić, Cristina Mottillo, Patrick Julien, Vjekoslav Štrukil, V. Honkimäki, Robert E. Dinnebier

Bibliographic record

VenueFaraday Discussions · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre in Green Chemistry and Catalysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanochemistrySynchrotron radiationBall millBeamlineMaterials scienceIn situDiffractionSynchrotronAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryNanotechnologyBeam (structure)OpticsPhysicsChromatographyMetallurgyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experimental technique for in situ and real-time monitoring of mechanochemical reactions in a shaker ball mill was recently described, which utilises highly penetrating X-ray radiation available at the ID15B beamline of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility. Herein, we describe the first attempts to perform such reaction monitoring in a quantitative fashion, by introducing an internal X-ray diffraction standard. The use of silicon as an internal standard resolved the issue with variations of the amount of the sample in the X-ray beam due to the non-uniform distribution of the sample in the reaction jar and allowed, via Rietveld analysis, the first quantitative estimate of the amorphous phase content in a mechanochemical reaction as it is being milled. We also highlight problems associated with the non-ideal mixing of the reaction mixture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations89
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaraday DiscussionsSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207