The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Strength of Brønsted Acid Sites in Microporous Aluminosilicates
Abstract
Ensemble-averaged deprotonation energies (DPE) derived from periodic density functional theory models are insensitive to the location of isolated Al atoms and associated protons and similar among microporous aluminosilicates (i.e., zeolites) with different crystalline frameworks (MFI, BEA, FER, MOR, CHA, FAU). These DPE values are 1201 ± 11 kJ mol –1 after correcting for systematic artifacts of periodic DFT methods, which vary with framework density, and averaging over the four distinct proton locations at each Al atom. These energies rigorously reflect the strength of the acid sites in these important catalytic solids. Thus, the stability of the conjugate anions and the acid strength of these materials merely reflect the presence of Al atoms within the silicate framework, and not their specific siting or local confining environment. DPE values did not show any systematic trends with the vibrational frequency or length of O–H bonds, with Si–O–Al bond angles, or with NH 3 adsorption enthalpies, properties that are frequently but inaccurately used as experimental indicators of acid strength. Such properties may reflect or bring forth confinement effects that do not influence acid strength, but which can stabilize the relevant ion-pair transition states and adsorbed intermediates through dispersion forces. These findings confirm that the different shape and size of the confining voids near Al atoms and their associated protons, instead of any differences in their acid strength, give rise to the remarkable diversity of acid forms of zeolites in the practice of catalysis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Catalytic consequences of acid strength in the conversion of methanol to dimethyl ether
Carr, R. T., Neurock, M., & Iglesia, E. (2011) · Journal of Catalysis · doi:10.1016/j.jcat.2010.11.017 · Cited by 203
Jones, A. J., & Iglesia, E. (2014) · Angewandte Chemie International Edition · doi:10.1002/anie.201406823 · Cited by 142
Self-citationOn the Preferential Location of Al and Proton Siting in Zeolites: A Computational and Infrared Study
Sastre, G., Fornes, V., & Corma, A. (2002) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp013189p · Cited by 93
Cited by
New trends in tailoring active sites in zeolite-based catalysts
Shamzhy, M., Opanasenko, M., Concepción, P., & Martínez, A. (2019) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c8cs00887f · Cited by 508
Ghorbanpour, A., Rimer, J. D., & Grabow, L. C. (2016) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/acscatal.5b02367 · Cited by 113
Toward the Atomic Scale Simulation of Intricate Acidic Aluminosilicate Catalysts
Chizallet, C. (2020) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/acscatal.0c01136 · Cited by 79
Spectroscopic Expression of the External Surface Sites of H-ZSM-5
Treps, L., Demaret, C., Wisser, D., Harbuzaru, B., Méthivier, A., Guillon, E., Benedis, D. V., Gomez, A., Bruin, T. D., Rivallan, M., et al. (2021) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c10200 · Cited by 63
Di Iorio, J. R., Hoffman, A. J., Nimlos, C. T., Nystrom, S., Hibbitts, D., & Gounder, R. (2019) · Journal of Catalysis · doi:10.1016/j.jcat.2019.10.012 · Cited by 61
Metadata
- Authors
- Jones, A. J., & Iglesia, E.
- Venue
- ACS Catalysis
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2015-08-31
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 5741-5755
- ISSN
- 2155-5435 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2254246740
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.