ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2021
Molecular simulations of the adsorption and separation of hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrogen and their binary mixtures (H
Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Removal of hydrogen sulfide from a binary mixture with methane gas, using IRMOF-1: a theoretical investigation.Journal of molecular modeling · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, the adsorptions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen, and hydrogen sulfide and the separation of their binary mixtures into NUM-3a Metal-Organic Framework (MOF) were studied through Grand Canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) simulation method. The simulated pure gas uptakes using three generic force fields (UFF, Dreiding, and OPLS) at 298 K were compared with the experimental values. The accuracy of the applied force fields for each gas was compared with the experimental isotherms and discussed. Our results show that OPLS has the best accuracy in the case of methane while Dreiding was the best for CO
Indexed as
Identifiers
33893884What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.