MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312577520 · doi:10.1071/ch22182

Gold extraction using novel ionic thiourea derivatives

2022· article· en· W4312577520 on OpenAlexaff
Megan L. Himmelman, Amir Joorab-Doozha, Christa L. Brosseau, Robert D. Singer

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Chemistry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThioureaGold cyanidationChemistryIonic liquidGold extractionCyanideExtraction (chemistry)HexafluorophosphateInorganic chemistryHydrometallurgyGreen chemistryAqueous solutionCopperOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyanidation has been used worldwide for over a century as the primary method for gold extraction from ore. Unfortunately, accidents have occurred that released toxic cyanide and resulted in devastation of the environment and surrounding communities. For this reason, alternatives to cyanidation have been of great interest but have yet to be implemented owing to the high costs of materials and necessary changes to infrastructure, which make these alternatives economically unfeasible. Reported herein is the use of novel ionic thiourea derivatives for the extraction of gold without the use of cyanide. A series of six pyrrolidinium and imidazolium salts have been functionalized with a thiourea group and either the anion hexafluorophosphate ([PF6]-) or dodecyl sulfate ([DS]-). Gold(iii) extraction up to 90% was achieved from an aqueous solution with a methyl imidazolium-tagged [DS] salt. Extraction experiments using gold(i) showed a decrease in extraction efficiency, suggesting the oxidation state of the gold is important for complex formation. The extraction selectivity for gold(iii) and silver(i) over copper(ii), iron(ii) and zinc(ii) was demonstrated for all ionic thiourea derivatives.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ChemistrySame topicExtraction and Separation ProcessesFrench-language works237,207