Organocatalytic Approaches to Asymmetric Oxidation: Epoxidation of α-Branched Enals and α-Benzoyloxylation of Carbonyl Compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A key challenge in the development of forward osmosis (FO) technology is to identify a suitable draw solute that can generate a large osmotic pressure with favorable water flux while being easy to recover after the FO process with a minimum of energy expenditure. While the CO<sub>2</sub>- and thermo-responsive linear poly(<i>N</i>,<i>N</i>-dimethylallylamine) polymer (l-PDMAAm) has been reported as a promising draw agent for forward osmosis desalination, the draw solutions sufficiently concentrated to have high osmotic pressure were too viscous to be usable in industrial operations. We now compare the viscosities and osmotic pressures of solutions of these polymers at low and high molecular weights and with/without branching. The best combination of high osmotic pressures with low viscosity can be obtained by using low molecular weights rather than branching. Aqueous solutions of the synthesized polymer showed a high osmotic pressure of 170 bar under CO<sub>2</sub> (π<sub>CO2</sub>) at 50 wt% loading, generating a high water flux against NaCl feed solutions in the FO process. Under air, however, the same polymer showed a low osmotic pressure and a cloud point between 26 and 33 °C (depending on concentration), which facilitates the recovery of the polymer after it has been used as a draw agent in the FO process upon removal of CO<sub>2</sub> from the system.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".