MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136395939 · doi:10.1002/cctc.201301071

Nanoporous Polymers: Bridging the Gap between Molecular and Solid Catalysts?

2014· article· en· W2136395939 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChemCatChem · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMetal-Organic Frameworks: Synthesis and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftRWTH Aachen UniversityUniversity of Regina
KeywordsNanoporousCatalysisPolymerNanotechnologyMaterials scienceHeterogeneous catalysisBridging (networking)Homogeneous catalysisChemical engineeringNanoparticleChemistryOrganic chemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The combination of the advantageous properties of molecular and solid catalysts is considered the “Holy Grail” in catalysis research. Great potential is provided by nanoporous polymers. Chemically well‐defined moieties in combination with a high stability render these materials suitable as catalyst supports for liquid‐phase and even aqueous‐phase catalytic processes, especially regarding the transition from fossil resources to renewable resources. In this Minireview, recent developments are summarized, covering the three main approaches: solid metal‐free organocatalysts, immobilized molecular catalyst species, and supported metal nanoparticles and clusters. Their potential is evaluated and the question as to whether nanoporous polymers can bridge the gap between homogeneous and heterogeneous catalysis is critically discussed.

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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.228 · 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