MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202886858 · doi:10.1016/j.mex.2021.101539

Method of developing Thermo–Kinetic diagrams: The Cu–H2O–acetate and the Cu-H2O systems

2021· article· en· W3202886858 on OpenAlexafffund
Kashif Mairaj Deen, Edouard Asselin

Bibliographic record

VenueMethodsX · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPourbaix diagramAqueous solutionRotating disk electrodeElectrochemistryChemistryKineticsDissolutionElectrolyteThermodynamicsVoltammetryInorganic chemistryCyclic voltammetryElectrodePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method to develop thermo-kinetic (TK) diagrams for the Cu−H2O−acetate and Cu−H2O systems is described. Conventional Eh-pH diagrams, also known as Pourbaix diagrams, are developed based on the thermodynamic stability of component species, typically in aqueous media. TK diagrams are an improvement on Eh-pH diagrams as they also describe the kinetics of electrochemical processes. These diagrams are developed by using data from linear scan voltammetry of Cu rotating disk electrodes exposed to aqueous media of different pH. By applying the same procedure, the TK diagrams can be developed for other metals or mineral systems exposed to aqueous media containing ligands. To ensure reproducibility and reconstruction of the TK diagrams for other metal/mineral/electrolyte systems, some important experimental considerations are highlighted in this study. These TK diagrams are useful to evaluate the corrosion of metals, the leaching performance of minerals and to predict the suitable conditions for metal recycling processes. Briefly, this article explains: Important experimental considerations that could affect the kinetics of electrochemical processes. A method to construct TK diagrams with examples of the Cu−H2O−acetate and Cu−H2O systems. With overlaid Eh-pH diagrams, TK diagrams explain both the thermodynamic stability of component species and the kinetics of the electrochemical processes.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethodsXSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207