The Research on the Coordinative and Competitive Relationship between MEA and DEA Absorbing CO2 into Aqueous Blended Amine Solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, 13 C NMR spectroscopy was used to study the reaction process of the 2.0 M blended amine of MEA-DEA (1:1) with CO 2 . The concentrations of free amines, the carbamates of amines, protonated amines, HCO 3 − and CO 3 2− in the solutions were generated over the CO 2 loading range from 0 to 0.7 mol CO 2 /mol amine at the temperature of 301K in order to understand the specific process of the reaction between the blended amine and CO 2 . The results show that only the carbamate of MEA was generated under lower CO 2 loading, which means that MEA is more competitive than DEA, while when the CO 2 loading, the carbamate of DEA (namely, DEACOO − ) was also generated, which means that when the CO 2 loading reached 0.231 mol CO 2 /mol amine and the concentration of MEA was decreased a certain extent, the abilities of MEA and DEA to react with CO 2 were well-matched.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".