MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214711834 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2021-0337

Hydrogenation of pyridine and hydrogenolysis of piperidine over <i>γ-</i>Mo<sub>2</sub>N catalyst: a DFT study

2022· article· en· W4214711834 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zainab N. Jaf, Hussein A. Miran

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCatalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrodenitrogenationPiperidineHydrogenolysisChemistryPyridineCatalysisAdsorptionDensity functional theoryInorganic chemistryNitrogenPhotochemistryOrganic chemistryComputational chemistryHydrodesulfurization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increasing demands on producing environmentally friendly products are becoming a driving force for designing highly active catalysts. Thus, surfaces that efficiently catalyse the nitrogen reduction reactions are greatly sought in moderating air-pollutant emissions. This contribution aims to computationally investigate the hydrodenitrogenation (HDN) networks of pyridine over the γ-Mo 2 N(111) surface using a density functional theory (DFT) approach. Various adsorption configurations have been considered for the molecularly adsorbed pyridine. Findings indicate that pyridine can be adsorbed via side-on and end-on modes in six geometries in which one adsorption site is revealed to have the lowest adsorption energy (–45.3 kcal/mol). Over a nitrogen hollow site adsorption site, initial HDN steps proceed by the stepwise hydrogenation of pyridine into piperidine followed by the Langmuir–Hinshelwood mechanism. The obtained findings are the first to theoretically model the hydrogenation pathways of pyridine to form piperidine and then the hydrogenolysis of piperidine producing C 5 H 12 and NH 3 over metal nitride. These paved the way for further investigations to better understanding such an important nitrogen removal reactions.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.577

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCatalysis and Hydrodesulfurization StudiesFrench-language works237,207