Long-Term γ-Radiolysis Kinetics of NO<sub>3</sub><sup>−</sup> and NO<sub>2</sub><sup>−</sup> Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radiolysis kinetics in NO(3)(-) and NO(2)(-) solutions during γ-irradiation were studied at an absorbed dose rate of 2.1 Gy·s(-1) at room temperature. Air- or argon-saturated nitrate or nitrite solutions at pH 6.0 and 10.6 were irradiated, and the aqueous concentrations of molecular water decomposition products, H(2) and H(2)O(2), and the variation in the concentrations of NO(3)(-) and NO(2)(-) were measured as a function of irradiation time. The experimental data were compared with computer simulations using a comprehensive radiolysis kinetic model to aid in interpretation of the experimental results. The effect of nitrate and nitrite, present at concentrations below 10(-3) M, on water radiolysis processes occurs through reactions with the radical species generated by water radiolysis, (•)e(aq)(-), (•)O(2)(-), and (•)OH. The changes in H(2) and H(2)O(2) concentrations observed in the presence of nitrate and nitrite under a variety of conditions can be explained by a reduction in the radical concentrations. The kinetic analysis shows that the main loss pathway for H(2) is the reaction with (•)OH and the main loss pathways for H(2)O(2) are reactions with (•)e(aq)(-) and (•)OH. Nitrate and nitrite compete for the radicals leading to an increase in the concentrations of H(2) and H(2)O(2). Post-irradiation measurements of H(2), H(2)O(2), NO(2)(-) and NO(3)(-) concentrations can be used to calculate the radical concentrations and provide information on the redox conditions of the irradiated aqueous solutions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".