MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413734459 · doi:10.1021/acsomega.5c07919

Selectively Adsorbed CO and O<sub>2</sub> on Transition-Metal-Incorporated Porphyrin

2025· article· en· W4413734459 on OpenAlexaff
Janghwan Cha, Hoonkyung Lee, Suklyun Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Omega · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsCenterLine (Canada)
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaKonkuk UniversitySejong University
KeywordsPorphyrinTransition metalAdsorptionChemistryMaterials sciencePhotochemistryCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide We have investigated the adsorption of CO and O 2 on transition-metal (TM)-incorporated porphyrin. Our calculations show that one or more CO molecules can be adsorbed on the Sc-, Ti-, V-, Cr-, or Mn-incorporated porphyrin, while only one CO molecule is adsorbed on the Fe- or Co-incorporated porphyrin. In the case of O 2, only one O 2 molecule prefers to adsorb on the TM-incorporated porphyrin, regardless of TM. Moreover, O 2 is strongly bound to the Sc-, Ti-, V-, Cr-, or Mn-incorporated porphyrin compared with that of CO, while it is weakly bound to the Fe- or Co-incorporated porphyrin compared with that of CO. Such different binding behaviors can be explained by variations of the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO) level in the d-orbitals of TM-incorporated porphyrin. We find that the HOMO levels are shifted downward in the cases of O 2 adsorption on the Sc-, Ti-, and V-incorporated porphyrin and CO adsorption on the Fe- and Co-incorporated porphyrin, indicating the stronger binding energies between them. These studies can be useful to understand the capture of CO and O 2 by the TM-incorporated porphyrin.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.910

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS OmegaSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207