Correlation of Stoichiometries for Rb<sup>+</sup> Extraction Determined by Mass Spectrometry and Electrochemistry at Liquid|Liquid Interfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The electrochemical extraction of rubidium at micro water|1,2-dichloroethane (w|DCE) and water|room-temperature ionic liquid (w|RTIL) interfaces housed at the tip of a 25-μm capillary using octyl(phenyl)-N,N-diisobutylcarbamoylmethylphosphine oxide (CMPO) in the TRans Uranic EXtraction (TRUEX) process, was examined. Rubidium is of great interest in a modern spent nuclear fuel cycle as well as toward myocardial perfusion imaging utilizing (82)Sr/(82)Rb isotopic generators. The ligand-to-metal stoichiometry (n:1) and overall complexation constant (β) for interfacial complexation reactions induced by an applied potential were determined by the interfacial electrochemistry. One stoichiometry, n = 2, was observed at the w|DCE interface with β = 3.3 × 10(4). In the w|RTIL system, two rubidium salt solutions were employed: RbNO(3) and RbNO(3) plus Rb(2)SO(4). The former demonstrated a stoichiometry of n = 2 and β = 2.4 × 10(6), while the latter showed n = 4 and β = 3.3 × 10(12). These stoichiometries of the reaction were confirmed by electrospray ionization mass spectrometry, using an emulsion generated by shaking water and DCE phases containing the dissolved metal and ligand, respectively. Both RbCMPO(+) and RbCMPO(2)(+) complexes were observed. The influence of ion pair interactions in this system will be 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".