Inhibition of Copper Deposition by Polyethylene Glycol and Chloride
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A physicochemical model for the effect of the additives polyethylene glycol (PEG) and on reduction onto a rotating-disk electrode in acidic sulfate solutions has been developed and fit to experimental potential scans to estimate kinetic parameters. The model, which applies to either transient or steady-state conditions, incorporates diffusion, convection, and a reaction mechanism that explicitly includes the effects of both additives. Very good agreement between the fitted model and experimental data is obtained. The model captures the range of voltammogram shapes experimentally observed over a wide range of additive levels (i.e., from the gradual loss of reduction inhibition with increasing overpotential at high PEG and concentrations to the sudden and complete breakdown of the inhibiting film at a critical potential when intermediate additive levels are used). An impedance model has also been derived and solved to generate impedance spectra using the previously obtained kinetic parameters. The predicted impedance spectra show good agreement with measured ones. Key aspects of the reaction mechanism are PEG desorption from the electrode, which occurs due to displacement by depositing copper, and the distinction made between the situations when the electrode is completely and partially covered by the inhibiting film.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".