MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399622938 · doi:10.32920/26018236

Copper Nanoparticle Heterogeneous Catalytic ‘Click’ Cycloaddition Confirmed by Single-Molecule Spectroscopy

2024· preprint· en· W4399622938 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew R. Decan, Stefania Impellizzeri, M. Luisa Marín, J. C. Scaiano

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicClick Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanomaterial-based catalystCatalysisHeterogeneous catalysisNanoparticleClick chemistryCycloadditionHomogeneous catalysisMoleculeChemistryCopperSonogashira couplingChemical engineeringCombinatorial chemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceOrganic chemistryPalladium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Colloidal or heterogeneous nanocatalysts can improve the range and diversity of Cu(I)-catalysed click reactions and facilitate catalyst separation and reuse. Catalysis by metal nanoparticles raises the question as to whether heterogeneous catalysts may cause homogeneous catalysis through metal ion leaching, since the catalytic process could be mediated by the particle, or by metal ions released from it. The question is critical as unwanted homogeneous processes could offset the benefits of heterogeneous catalysis. Here, we combine standard bench scale techniques with single-molecule spectroscopy to monitor single catalytic events in real time and demonstrate that click catalysis occurs directly at the surface of copper nanoparticles; this general approach could be implemented in other systems. We use ‘from the mole to the molecule’ to describe this emerging idea in which mole scale reactions can be optimized through an intimate understanding of the catalytic process at the single-molecule—single catalytic nanoparticle level.</p>

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClick Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207