MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010845853 · doi:10.1039/d0cp00601g

Yields of primary species in the low-linear energy transfer radiolysis of water in the temperature range of 25–700 °C

2020· article· en· W3010845853 on OpenAlexafffund
Abida Sultana, Jintana Meesungnoen, Jean‐Paul Jay‐Gerin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Chemistry Chemical Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicRadioactive element chemistry and processing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRadiolysisRange (aeronautics)Atmospheric temperature rangePrimary (astronomy)Energy transferEnergy (signal processing)Linear energy transferChemistryTransfer (computing)ThermodynamicsMaterials scienceChemical physicsPhysical chemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistryAqueous solutionAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monte Carlo track chemistry simulations were used to calculate the time-dependent yields (G values) for the radical (eaq-, H˙, ˙OH) and molecular (H2, H2O2) "primary species" formed in the low-linear energy transfer (LET) radiolysis of deaerated, pure water (H2O) in the range of ∼1 ps to 1 ms between 25 and 700 °C, at 25 MPa pressure. Beyond the critical point, we used in the calculations the new supercritical water (SCW) radiolysis database of Liu et al., in particular their reported reaction rate constants. A striking conclusion of these simulations is the sharp increase in G(˙OH) and G(H2), and the corresponding decrease in G(H˙), which are observed above 200 °C, due to the oxidation of water by the H˙ atom (H˙ + H2O → ˙OH + H2) in the homogeneous chemical stage of radiolysis. These results may have important implications for proposed Generation-IV SCW-cooled reactors for the control and management of water chemistry and for the maintenance of the structural integrity of materials.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.855

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Chemistry Chemical PhysicsSame topicRadioactive element chemistry and processingFrench-language works237,207