MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136539757 · doi:10.1002/cjce.20583

Supported single‐site catalysts for slurry and gas‐phase olefin polymerisation

2011· article· en· W2136539757 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yiyoung Choi, João B. P. Soares

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyolefinSlurryCatalysisCommodity chemicalsPolymerGas phasePolymerizationCommodityTransition metalOlefin fiberMaterials scienceOlefin polymerizationPhase (matter)Chemical industryIndustrial catalystsChemical engineeringPolymer scienceNanotechnologyChemistryOrganic chemistryCatalyst supportEngineeringComposite materialBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Early and late transition metal single‐site catalysts revolutionised the polyolefin manufacturing industry and research with their ability to make polymers with uniform microstructural properties. Several of these catalysts are currently used commercially to produce commodity and differentiated‐commodity resins. The key to their rapid success and industrial implementation resided in the fact that they could be used without major modifications in the polymerisation reactors that previously used heterogeneous Ziegler–Natta and Phillips catalysts. Since most of these industrial processes use slurry or gas‐phase reactors, the soluble single‐site catalysts must be supported on adequate carriers that ensure not only high activity, but also the formation of polymer particles with the proper morphology and bulk densities. In this article, we will review several methods used for supporting single‐site early and late transition metal catalysts on a variety of supports. © 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 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.175 · 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.

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

Citations57
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207