MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519751280 · doi:10.1021/acs.oprd.6b00245

Effect of Metals on the Hydrogenolysis of Glycerol to Higher Value Sustainable and Green Chemicals Using a Supported HSiW Catalyst

2016· article· en· W2519751280 on OpenAlexafffund
Flora T. T. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganic Process Research & Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCatalysis for Biomass Conversion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBộ Giáo dục và Ðào tạo
KeywordsHydrogenolysisCatalysisChemistrySilicotungstic acidGlycerolAlcoholMetalInorganic chemistryReactivity (psychology)Acid strengthOrganic chemistryZeolite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pt, Pd, Ni, and Cu supported on HSiW/Al 2 O 3 catalysts were studied for the hydrogenolysis of glycerol. It was found that Pt is the best promoter for the production of 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PD) and 1-propanol (1-PO). Ni, a much cheaper metal, has fairly comparable reactivity to Pt, while Cu does not show any activity for the production of 1,3-PD. The catalysts were characterized by XRD and NH 3 -TPD. The strength of the acid sites affects the distribution of products. A reaction mechanism for a NiHSiW/Al 2 O 3 catalyst involving rate-determining parallel dehydration of primary alcohol to produce acetal and of secondary alcohol to produce 3-hydroxypropylaldehdye (3-HPA) was proposed. Hydrogenolysis of 1,3-PD is 15 times slower than that of 1,2-PD. Most of the 1-PO is derived from 1,2-PD. An optimal balance of acid sites of appropriate acid strength and hydrogenation sites will lead to a highly selective catalyst for the production of higher value sustainable chemicals from glycerol.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganic Process Research & DevelopmentSame topicCatalysis for Biomass ConversionFrench-language works237,207