The gas-phase reaction of NH2 with formaldehyde (CH2O) is not a source of formamide (NH2CHO) in interstellar environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first experimental study of the low-temperature kinetics of the gas-phase reaction of NH2 with formaldehyde (CH2O) has been performed. This reaction has previously been suggested as a source of formamide (NH2CHO) in interstellar environments. A pulsed Laval nozzle equipped with laser-flash photolysis and laser-induced fluorescence spectroscopy was used to create and monitor the temporal decay of NH2 in the presence of CH2O. No loss of NH2 could be observed via reaction with CH2O and we place an upper-limit on the rate coefficient of <6x10-12 cm3 molecule-1 s-1 at 34K. Ab initio calculations of the potential energy surface were combined with RRKM calculations to predict a rate coefficient of 6.2x10-14 cm3 molecule-1 s-1 at 35K, consistent with the experimental results. The presence of a significant barrier, 18 kJ mol-1, for the formation of formamide as a product, means that only the H-abstraction channel producing NH3 + CHO, in which the transfer of an H-atom can occur by quantum mechanical tunnelling through a 23 kJ mol-1 barrier, is open at low temperatures. These results are in contrast with a recent theoretical study which suggested that the reaction could proceed without a barrier and was therefore a viable route to gas-phase formamide formation. The calculated rate coefficients were used in an astrochemical model which demonstrated that this reaction produces only negligible amounts of gas-phase formamide under interstellar and circumstellar conditions. The reaction of NH2 with CH2O is therefore not an important source of formamide at low temperatures in interstellar environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".