MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096547422 · doi:10.1021/jacs.0c07965

Reducing CO <sub>2</sub> to HCO <sub>2</sub> <sup>–</sup> at Mild Potentials: Lessons from Formate Dehydrogenase

2020· article· en· W3096547422 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jenny Y. Yang, Tyler A. Kerr, Xinran S. Wang, Jeffrey M. Barlow

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchBasic Energy SciencesCamille and Henry Dreyfus FoundationAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsChemistryHydrideHeterolysisFormateCatalysisFormate dehydrogenaseProtonElectron transferMetalElectrochemistryInorganic chemistryRedoxElectronPhotochemistryComputational chemistryCombinatorial chemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryElectrodeNuclear physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The catalytic reduction of CO 2 to HCO 2 – requires a formal transfer of a hydride (two electrons, one proton). Synthetic approaches for inorganic molecular catalysts have exclusively relied on classic metal hydrides, where the proton and electrons originate from the metal (via heterolytic cleavage of an M–H bond). An analysis of the scaling relationships that exist in classic metal hydrides reveal that hydride donors sufficiently hydridic to perform CO 2 reduction are only accessible at very reducing electrochemical potentials, which is consistent with known synthetic electrocatalysts. By comparison, the formate dehydrogenase enzymes operate at relatively mild potentials. In contrast to reported synthetic catalysts, none of the major mechanistic proposals for hydride transfer in formate dehydrogenase proceed through a classic metal hydride. Instead, they invoke formal hydride transfer from an orthogonal or bidirectional mechanism, where the proton and electrons are not colocated. We discuss the thermodynamic advantages of this approach for favoring CO 2 reduction at mild potentials, along with guidelines for replicating this strategy in synthetic systems.

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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations94
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicCO2 Reduction Techniques and CatalystsFrench-language works237,207