Sustainability of Green Synthetic Processes and Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the ecological footprint was perhaps the first green metric, the atom economy and E-factor have become the key metrics of green chemistry by providing the mass balance of chemical reactions and processes at the molecular level. Sustainability was poorly defined originally, since the key requisite to accurately forecast the needs of future generations remains difficult to pinpoint. Consequently, sustainability was replaced with suitability by many stake holders, as they had vested and/or conflicts of interests to label suitable developments sustainable. The sustainable development goals recently introduced by the United Nations seem to serve as a ‘roadmap to happiness’ instead of metrics. A simple and independent definition of sustainability was recently provided: Nature's resources, including energy, should be used at a rate at which they can be replaced naturally, and the generation of wastes cannot be faster than the rate of their remediation by Nature. The ethanol equivalent, the sustainability values of resource replacement and fate of waste, and the sustainability indicator have been recently defined to measure the sustainability of biomass-based carbon-chemicals and renewable energy. The production of ethylene, propylene, toluene, xylenes, styrene, and ethylene oxides cannot be sustainable due to the limited amount of bioethanol. The required volume of corn and the corresponding size of land are only enough to replace one sixth of fossil resources in the USA, EU, and China, and practically insufficient in Canada and the Russian Federation. Until the utilization of electricity becomes practical and economical in aviation, biomass-based liquid fuels are the sustainable alternative.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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".