Synthesis strategies of covalent organic frameworks: An overview from nonconventional heating methods and reaction media
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
Covalent organic frameworks (COFs), as an emerging class of porous crystalline materials constructed by covalent links between the building monomers, have gained tremendous attention. Over the past 15 years, COFs have made rapid progress and substantial development in the chemistry and materials fields. However, the synthesis of COFs has been dominated by solvothermal methods for a long time and it usually involves high temperature, high pressure and toxic organic solvents, which created many challenges for environmental considerations. Recently, the exploration of new approaches for facile fabrication of COFs has aroused extensive interest. Hence, in this review, we comprehensively describe the synthetic strategies of COFs from the aspects of nonconventional heating methods and reaction media. In addition, the advantages, limitations and properties of the preparation methods are compared. Finally, we outline the main challenges and development prospects of the synthesis of COFs in the future and propose some possible solutions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.012 | 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