MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390266041 · doi:10.1103/physreve.108.064413

Coupled chemical reactions: Effects of electric field, diffusion, and boundary control

2023· article· en· W4390266041 on OpenAlexafffund
Shixin Xu, Bob Eisenberg, Zilong Song, Huaxiong Huang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics research
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDissipative systemChemical reactionElectric fieldChemical energyElectric potential energyElectrostaticsChemical physicsDomain (mathematical analysis)Chain reactionPhysicsDiffusionChemical processElectrolyteEnergy (signal processing)ChemistryThermodynamicsElectrodeQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical reactions involve the movement of charges, and this paper presents a mathematical model for describing chemical reactions in electrolytes. The model is developed using an energy variational method that aligns with classical thermodynamics principles. It encompasses both electrostatics and chemical reactions within consistently defined energetic and dissipative functionals. Furthermore, the energy variation method is extended to account for open systems that involve the input and output of charge and mass. Such open systems have the capability to convert one form of input energy into another form of output energy. In particular, a two-domain model is developed to study a reaction system with self-regulation and internal switching, which plays a vital role in the electron transport chain of mitochondria responsible for ATP generation-a crucial process for sustaining life. Simulations are conducted to explore the influence of electric potential on reaction rates and switching dynamics within the two-domain system. It shows that the electric potential inhibits the oxidation reaction while accelerating the reduction reaction.

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)0.003
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicPhotoreceptor and optogenetics researchFrench-language works237,207