Liquid-Liquid Extraction of Mercury (II) from Hydrochloric and Nitric Acid Solutions by Trioctyl Phosphine Oxide.
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
The extraction of mercury (II) from hydrochloric and nitric acid solutions by trioctyl phosphine oxide (TOPO) in benzene has been investigated under different conditions. The organic extracts were examined by infrared, Raman and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopies. As the results, it was found that with increasing the concentration of aqueous hydrochloric acid solutions, the distribution coefficient for TOPO decreased below 1 mol dm-3 HCl and rised to a maximum at about 4 mol dm-3 HCl and then fell. The distribution behavior for the extraction of mercury (II) by TOPO from nitric acid solutions was analogous to that from hydrochloric acid solutions, while their extraction efficiencies were in the order of extraction systems HCl > HNO3. Consequently the following equilibrium equations are proposed for the extraction of mercury (II) from hydrochloric and nitric acid solutions by TOPO : for HCl extraction system, HgCl2 (a) + 2TOPO (o) ⇔ HgCl2·2TOPO (o), HgCl42- (a) + 2H+ (a) + 2TOPO (o) ⇔ H2HgCl4 · 2TOPO (o) and when mercury loading increases HgCl2 (a) + TOPO (o) ⇔ HgCl2·TOPO (o) ; for HNO3 extraction system, Hg (NO3)2 (a) + 2TOPO (o) ⇔ Hg (NO3)2·2TOPO (o) and Hg (NO3)42- (a) + 2H+ (a) + 2TOPO (o) ⇔ H2Hg (NO3)4·2TOPO (o).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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