A Comprehensive Review of Adsorbents for Rare Earth Separation: Design, Synthesis, Adsorption Performance, and Mechanisms
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
ABSTRACT Rare earth elements (REEs) play an irreplaceable role in modern technology and industry. However, due to the highly similar physicochemical properties among REEs, their separation remains a significant challenge. Additionally, REEs often exist in low‐concentration solutions, making efficient REE recovery an urgent task. This paper presents a comprehensive review of the latest research advances in adsorbents for REE adsorption from aqueous solutions. It systematically examines the performance characteristics of organic, inorganic, biological, and composite adsorbents, with a focus on innovative design, synthesis strategies, and practical applications of various adsorbents, particularly highlighting their excellent adsorption performance and diverse mechanisms. Notably, composite and hybrid materials significantly enhance adsorption selectivity and stability through synergistic effects. Future research should focus on machine learning (ML)‐driven adsorbent intelligent design using quantitative structure–activity/property relationship (QSAR/QSPR) models, green synthesis pathways, adsorption–desorption performance enhancement, and industrial process optimization via interdisciplinary collaboration. This review aims to provide a systematic reference for research on adsorption and separation of REEs, thereby promoting the development and application of high‐efficiency and eco‐friendly adsorbents.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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