MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412012572 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2025-ff3vd

Studying the significance of the parameters involved in the synthesis of Y-UiO-66 to improve product yield

2025· preprint· en· W4412012572 on OpenAlexafffund
Micaela Richezzi, P. Rafael Donnarumma, Ashlee J. Howarth

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPigment Synthesis and Properties
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia UniversityCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsYield (engineering)Product (mathematics)ChemistryProcess engineeringMaterials scienceMathematicsEngineeringMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The significance of the parameters involved in the synthesis of rare-earth metal–organic frameworks (RE-MOFs) has not been studied in depth. Design of experiments (DoE) is used herein to determine the impact of seven synthetic parameters on the yield and surface area of Y-UiO-66 (UiO = University of Oslo). The seven synthetic parameters are evaluated through 16 experiments, leading to a new synthetic procedure for Y-UiO-66 that increases the yield from 30 % to 84 % while maintaining high crystallinity and surface area. These results show that a simple screening design, using DoE, is useful for the improvement of MOF synthesis. The new procedure is successfully adapted to scale-up the reaction twenty times, as well as to improve the yield of Ho- and Yb-UiO-66, demonstrating that it can be extended to lanthanoid analogues of UiO-66. The results obtained from the design were used to improve the yield of Tb-CU-27 (CU = Concordia University) with only one experiment, suggesting that the synthetic parameters identified as being significant for Y-UiO-66 have a similar effect on other RE cluster-based MOFs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicPigment Synthesis and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207