A comparative kinetics study of CO<sub>2</sub> absorption into aqueous DEEA/MEA and DMEA/MEA blended solutions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The kinetics of CO 2 absorption into aqueous solutions of N,N‐diethylethanolamine (DEEA), and N,N‐dimethylethanolamine (DMEA), and their blends with monoethanolamine (MEA) have been studied in a stopped‐flow apparatus. The kinetics experiments were carried out at the concentrations of DEEA and DMEA varying from 0.075 to 0.175 kmol/m 3 , respectively, and that of MEA ranging between 0.0075 and 0.0175 kmol/m 3 , over the temperature range of 293–313 K. Two kinetics models are proposed to interpret the reaction in the blended amine systems and the results show that the model which incorporates the base‐catalyzed hydration mechanism and termolecular mechanism resulted in a better prediction. Furthermore, the kinetics behaviors of CO 2 absorption into two blended systems are comprehensively discussed according to their molecular structures. It can be concluded that the interaction between tertiary amines and primary amines as well as the alkyl chain length of tertiary amines have a significant influence on the kinetics. © 2017 American Institute of Chemical Engineers AIChE J , 64: 1350–1358, 2018
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it