Kinetic study of multiphase reactions under microwave irradiation: A mini-review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microwave (MW) heating is rapid, selective, and volumetric, and it is a compelling non-conventional heating approach for driving chemical reactions. The effect of MW irradiation on the kinetics of thermal/catalytic reactions is still under debate. A group of researchers reported that the effect of MW heating on reaction kinetics is highlighted through the non-thermal effects of MWs on kinetic parameters and reaction mechanisms in addition to the thermal effect. However, another group attributed the observations to the thermal effect only. In the present work, we summarized and critically synthesized available information in the literature on the subject. It can be concluded that MW heating has solely the thermal effect on gas-solid reactions, and the variations of kinetic parameters are related to the direct and indirect impacts of that. Temperature measurement limitations, physical structure variation, and non-uniform temperature distribution are the primary sources of the discrepancy in previous studies. In ionic liquid-solid reactions, the presence of electromagnetic fields can affect the movement of ions/polar molecules which can be considered a non-thermal effect of MWs. However, the effect of MW absorption by solid/catalyst, and the formation of hot spots must be taken into account to avoid potential discrepancy. Therefore, further theoretical/experimental studies are required to clarify the effect of MWs on liquid-solid reactions. In addition, developing reliable temperature measurement methods and isothermal reaction domain are required for an accurate kinetic study during MW irradiation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".