ArticleRSC advances2026
Efficient screening for enhanced Xe/Kr separation
Article in RSC advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The separation of xenon (Xe) and krypton (Kr), being an energy-intensive process, has attracted considerable research interest in developing alternative separation methods and materials over the past two decades. Considerable progress has been achieved in discovering sorbent materials with high Xe/Kr selectivity. Due to their tunable pore geometries and interaction strengths, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) have gained consensus as promising alternatives. For this goal, computational screening methods have been widely adopted to accelerate the discovery of high-performing candidates. However, the computational cost of brute-force screening involving adsorption simulations for millions of structures is prohibitive. Therefore, a practical approach is to partition large-scale screening into manageable subsets focusing on materials with shared chemical features. To conserve computational resources, applying reasonable filters on pore-related geometric features demonstrating significant variation is advisable. Based on these considations, we present a ligand-focused screening strategy employing preliminary geometric filters, including a pore-limiting diameter (PLD) ranging from 3.3 to 8.2 Å and a largest cavity diameter (LCD)/PLD ratio between 1 and 2, together with the restriction to single-ligand-assembled MOFs to facilitate structure-property interpretation. The procedure is exemplified using the ligand 1,1,2,2-tetra(4-carboxyphenyl)ethylene (H
Identifiers
What 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.