Enantiomeric separation of tryptophan via novel chiral polyamide composite membrane
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
Abstract The separation of chiral drugs continues to pose a significant challenge. However, in recent years, the emergence of membrane‐based chiral separation has shown promising effectiveness due to its environmentally friendly, energy‐efficient, and cost‐effective characteristics. In this study, we prepared chiral composite membrane via interfacial polymerization (IP), utilizing β‐cyclodextrin (β‐CD) and piperazine (PIP) as mixed monomers in the aqueous phase. The chiral separation process was facilitated by β‐CD, serving as a chiral selective agent. The resulting membrane were characterized using SEM, FT‐IR, and XPS. Subsequently, the chiral separation performance of the membrane for DL‐tryptophan (Trp) was investigated. Lastly, the water flux, dye rejection, and stability of the membrane were also examined. The results showed that the optimized chiral PIP 0.5 β‐CD 0.5 membrane achieved an enantiomeric excess percentage (ee%) of 43.0% for D‐Trp, with a solute flux of 66.18 nmol·cm −2 ·h −1 , and maintained a good chiral separation stability. Additionally, the membrane demonstrated positive performance in the selective separation of mixed dyes, allowing for steady operation over a long period of time. This study offers fresh insights into membrane‐based chiral separations.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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