MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962455467 · doi:10.1002/cjce.23595

Preparation and characterization of cysteine‐formaldehyde cross‐linked complex for CO<sub>2</sub> capture

2019· article· en· W2962455467 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tianxiang Guo, Junpeng Xu, Zeng Fan, Yarong Du, Yuanfeng Pan, Huining Xiao, Mladen Eić, Gengjie Qin, Yuchen Guo, HU Yun-Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCarbon Dioxide Capture Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsFormaldehydePyrolysisChemistryFourier transform infrared spectroscopyCysteineAdsorptionAmideCrystallographyInorganic chemistryMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work focused on the preparation and characterization of cysteine‐formaldehyde cross‐linked complex derived from cysteine hydrochloride and formaldehyde. The cross‐linked complex was prepared based on the nucleophilic substitution reaction of cysteine with formaldehyde accompanied by π bond breakage of carbonyl from formaldehyde. Meanwhile, its surface morphology, element composition, group distribution, and thermodynamics were experimentally investigated by means of SEM, XRD, EA, EDS, 1 H‐NMR, FTIR, BET, and TGA as well as an analysis of the characteristics of CO 2 adsorption. The results indicated that the as‐prepared cross‐linked complex exhibited a rod‐shaped hollow crystal structure with a lateral distribution of sulphur and nitrogen atoms toward the crystal surface. As a mesoporous crystal material, the cross‐linked complex presented a four‐step (amide forming, fast pyrolysis, slow pyrolysis, and dehydrogenation) pyrolysis above 430 K, yet possessed a relatively acceptable thermodynamic stability below 430 K. In addition, the interaction mechanism between the cysteine hydrochloride and formaldehyde was revealed by characteristics and simulation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicCarbon Dioxide Capture TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207