Study of “coordinative effect” within bi‐blended amine MEA + AMP and MEA + BEA at 0.1 + 2–0.5 + 2 mol/L with absorption–desorption parameter analyses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The “coordinative effect” was discovered in MEA + DEA bi‐solvents already, and it enhances both CO 2 absorption and desorption within MEA + RR'NH simultaneously. A recent study verified strong coordinative effects within MEA + BEA (RR'NH) + AMP tri‐solvents, but whether the coordination was 100% attributed to interaction of MEA + BEA needs to be confirmed. This study investigated the “coordinative effect” separately within MEA + AMP (hindered amine) and MEA + BEA (RR'NH). The CO 2 absorption and desorption processes were performed onto MEA + AMP and MEA + BEA (0.1 + 2–0.5 + 2 mol/L) separately. The CO 2 absorption–desorption parameters were calculated to evaluate the coordinative effects on a consistent level. Results indicated negligible “coordinative effect” within MEA + AMP but strong coordination within MEA + BEA. Both CO 2 absorption and desorption performance of MEA + BEA (0.2 + 2 mol/L) was better than 2.0 mol/L BEA simultaneously. The coordinative effect was optimum within MEA + BEA bi‐solvents at 0.2 + 2 mol/L close to 0.3 + 2 + 2 mol/L of MEA + BEA + AMP tri‐solvents. Based on analysis, carbamate stability and pK a were two main factors that determine negligible–strong coordinative effects between AMP and BEA; different pK a reflected the optimized blending ratios of MEA + DEA (3/7) and MEA + BEA (2/20).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it