MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556166200 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22730

CO<sub>2</sub> reverse water‐gas shift reaction on mesoporous M‐CeO<sub>2</sub> catalysts

2016· article· en· W2556166200 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology
KeywordsCatalysisWater-gas shift reactionMesoporous materialMaterials scienceTransition metalSelectivityChemical engineeringInorganic chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mesoporous M‐CeO 2 (M = Ni, Co, Fe, Mn, and Cu) catalysts were prepared using the hard‐template method and applied to investigate CO 2 reverse water‐gas shift (RWGS) reaction. The physicochemical properties were studied using H 2 ‐TPR, XRD, BET, CO 2 ‐TPD, and H 2 ‐TPD. Results show that the specific surface areas of the prepared Ni‐CeO 2 , Co‐CeO 2 , Fe‐CeO 2 , Mn‐CeO 2 , and Cu‐CeO 2 catalysts exceed 120 m 2 /g. CO 2 RWGS reaction performances are affected by the d ‐orbital holes of transition metals. CO 2 RWGS reaction catalytic activities are ranked as follows: Ni‐CeO 2 &gt; Cu‐CeO 2 &gt; Co‐CeO 2 &gt; Fe‐CeO 2 ≈ Mn‐CeO 2 . The Cu‐CeO 2 , Fe‐CeO 2 , and Mn‐CeO 2 catalysts maintain 100 % CO selectivity at the studied temperature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · 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