MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740607114 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2017-0155

Pressure-selected reactivity between 2-butyne and water induced by two-photon excitation

2017· article· en· W2740607114 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Jiwen Guan, Roshan Daljeet, Yang Song

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPhotochemistry and Electron Transfer Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and Innovation
KeywordsChemistryDissociation (chemistry)PhotochemistryCatalysisKineticsIsomerizationPolymerizationReactivity (psychology)Fourier transform infrared spectroscopyInfraredMoleculePhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryPolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-pressure photochemistry between 2-butyne (H 3 CC≡CCH 3 ) and trace amount of H 2 O was investigated at room temperature using multiline UV radiation at λ ≈ 350 nm and monitored by FTIR spectroscopy. Instead of the expected polymerization of 2-butyne, the IR spectral analysis suggests the formation of cis- and trans-2-butene, as well as 2-butanone, as the primary products. The possible reaction mechanisms and production pathways of these products were examined, where the dissociation of water molecule as the other reactant is believed as the essential step of the photochemical reaction. We further found that initial loading pressure of the mixture can not only substantially influence the reaction kinetics, but also regulate the accessibilities to some reaction channels, which was evidenced by quantitative analysis of the characteristic IR bands of 2-butene and 2-butanone. The relative abundance of two products is found to be highly dependent on pressure and radiation time. This study provides attractive physical routes in the absence of solvents, catalysts, and radical initiators, to synthesis the relevant products with a great selectivity and feasibility.

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 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicPhotochemistry and Electron Transfer StudiesFrench-language works237,207