Cluster adsorption of histidine enantiomers on carbon nanotubes from aqueous solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is devoted to the analysis of adsorption isotherms of histidine enantiomers on carbon nanotubes mkNANO MKN-SWCNT S1 from aqueous solutions in the temperature range 25-80°C. Histidine enantiomers from Sigma Aldrich were used as amino acids, and mkNANO MKN-SWCNT S1 carbon nanotubes (Canada) were used as an adsorbent. Experimental data obtained by the construction of isotherms, were used to calculate the separation coefficients of enantiomers on CNTs, the values of separation coefficients were higher than for other sorbents. The interpretation of the isotherms was based on the cluster adsorption model, providing very good agreement between theory and experiment (R2=0.994-0.999), which showed that L- and D-histidine were sorbed on the surface of a nanotube in the form of monomers and clusters. Three characteristic regions were identified on the adsorption isotherms: concentration range in which only sorbate monomers were fixed on the surface of the nanotube; concentration range in which sorbate molecules were fixed on the nanotube only in the form of clusters; concentration range in which monomers and clusters were present on the surface of the sorbent. The dependence of these isotherm regions on temperature was analysed.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".