MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320107382 · doi:10.1515/pac-2014-1118

Mechanistic insights from mass spectrometry: examination of the elementary steps of catalytic reactions in the gas phase

2015· article· en· W2320107382 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePure and Applied Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsChemistryMass spectrometryGas phaseCatalysisElementary reactionReactive intermediateCatalytic cyclePhase (matter)Genetic algorithmReaction intermediateNanotechnologyPhysical chemistryChromatographyOrganic chemistryKinetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Real-time mass spectrometric monitoring of speciation in a catalytic reaction while it is occurring provides powerful insights into mechanistic aspects of the reaction, but cannot be expected to elucidate all details. However, mass spectrometers are not limited just to analysis: they can serve as reaction vessels in their own right, and given their powers of separation and activation in the gas phase, they are also capable of generating and isolating reactive intermediates. We can use these capabilities to help fill in our overall understanding of the catalytic cycle by examining the elementary steps that make it up. This article provides examples of how these simple reactions have been examined in the gas phase.

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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.230 · 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