Another Unprecedented Wieland Mechanism Confirmed: Hydrogen Formation from Hydrogen Peroxide, Formaldehyde, and Sodium Hydroxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 1923, Wieland and Wingler reported that in the molecular hydrogen producing reaction of hydrogen peroxide with formaldehyde in basic solution, free hydrogen atoms (H.) are not involved. They postulated that bis(hydroxymethyl)peroxide, HOCH2OOCH2OH, is the intermediate, which decomposes to yield H2 and formate, proposing a mechanism that would nowadays be considered as a “concerted process”. Since then, several other (conflicting) “mechanisms” have been suggested. Our NMR and Raman spectroscopic and kinetic studies, particularly the determination of the deuterium kinetic isotope effect (DKIE), now confirm that in this base‐dependent reaction, both H atoms of H2 derive from the CH2 hydrogen atoms of formaldehyde, and not from the OH groups of HOCH2OOCH2OH or from water. Quantum‐chemical CBS‐QB3 and W1BD computations show that H2 release proceeds through a concerted process, which is strongly accelerated by double deprotonation of HOCH2OOCH2OH, thereby ruling out a free radical pathway.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".