MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912297782 · doi:10.3390/pr7020081

Reaction Kinetics of Carbon Dioxide in Aqueous Blends of N-Methyldiethanolamine and L-Arginine Using the Stopped-Flow Technique

2019· article· en· W2912297782 on OpenAlexaff
Nafis Mahmud, Abdelbaki Benamor, Mustafa S. Nasser, Muftah H. El‐Naas, Paitoon Tontiwachwuthikul

Bibliographic record

VenueProcesses · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersQatar National Research Fund
KeywordsCarbon dioxideArginineAmine gas treatingZwitterionChemistryAqueous solutionFlue gasKineticsGlycineReaction rateReaction rate constantAmino acidChemical engineeringNuclear chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysisBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reduction of carbon dioxide emission from natural and industrial flue gases is paramount to help mitigate its effect on global warming. Efforts are continuously deployed worldwide to develop efficient technologies for CO2 capture. The use of environment friendly amino acids as rate promoters in the present amine systems has attracted the attention of many researchers recently. In this work, the reaction kinetics of carbon dioxide with blends of N-methyldiethanolamine and L-Arginine was investigated using stopped flow technique. The experiments were performed over a temperature range of 293 to 313 K and solution concentration up to one molar of different amino acid/amine ratios. The overall reaction rate constant (kov) was found to increase with increasing temperature and amine concentration as well as with increased proportion of L-Arginine concentration in the mixture. The experimental data were fitted to the zwitterion and termolecular mechanisms using a nonlinear regression technique with an average absolute deviation (AAD) of 7.6% and 8.0%, respectively. A comparative study of the promoting effect of L-Arginine with that of the effect of Glycine and DEA in MDEA blends showed that MDEA-Arginine blend exhibits faster reaction rate with CO2 with respect to MDEA-DEA blend, while the case was converse when compared to the MDEA-Glycine blend.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcessesSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207